*  MAR  31  1902   * 


BR  121  .M73  1901 
Moore,  Albert  Weston,  b 
1842- 

The  rational  basis  of 
nrthorfoxv 


THE  RATIONAL  BASIS 
OF  ORTHODOXY 


BY 


ALBERT  WESTON  MOORE,  D.  D. 


m^^^sm 


BOSTON  AND  NEW  YORK 

HOUGHTON,  MIFFLIN  AND  COMPANY 

m>t  0iter?ibe  ptt^^,  Cambriboe 


COPYRIGHT,  190I,  BY  ALBERT  WESTON  MOORE 
ALL   RIGHTS   RESERVED 


Published  September ^  iqoi 


DEDICATION 

To  students  in  colleges  and  other  educational 
institutions^  and  to  all  thoughtful  persons  in  the 
pulpit  and  the  pews  who  are  in  sympathy  with  the 
obvious  teachings  of  the  New  Testament^  hut  have 
been  misled  by  the  one-sided  trend  of  contemporary 
thought  into  suspecting  that  their  religious  hopes 
cannot  claim  a  rational  sanction  of  as  high  a  kind 
as  attaches  to  secular  beliefs,  this  book  is  affec" 
tionately  dedicated. 


PKEFACE 

It  is  not  pretended  that  the  following  chapters 
contain  anything  like  a  thorough  and  exhaustive 
treatment  of  the  subjects  to  which  they  are  re- 
spectively devoted.  It  will  be  sufficiently  obvious 
that  the  plan  of  the  work  permitted  me  only  to 
compress  into  a  small  space  a  few  salient  points 
under  each  of  the  heads  into  which  the  book  is 
divided.  It  has  been  my  aim  simply  to  trace  in 
outline  the  course  of  reasoning  by  which,  as  I  am 
convinced,  what  is  commonly  known  as  evangelical 
Christianity  may  be  coordinated  with  other  beliefs, 
scientific  or  philosophical,  which  men  of  education 
deem  themselves  justified  in  confidently  adopting. 
I  have  also  forborne,  for  the  sake  of  brevity,  to 
discuss  some  of  the  dogmas  which  would  nat- 
urally be  suggested  by  the  title  of  the  book,  and 
have  limited  myself  to  the  consideration  of  those 
which  I  conceive  to  be  of  the  first  importance. 
The  doctrine  of  immortality,  however,  which  un- 
doubtedly ranks  with  these,  seems  to  me  to  follow  so 
naturally  from  the  resurrection  of  Christ  that  a 
special  discussion  of  it  may  be  properly  omitted, 


vi  PREFACE 

although  in  a  larger  work  a  chapter  might  be  de- 
voted to  it. 

The  first  chapter  was  published  a  number  of 
years  ago,  in  substantially  its  present  form,  in  a 
denominational  newspaper,  after  having  been  twice 
read  at  representative  gatherings  of  ministers  or 
laymen.  I  received  at  the  time  by  mail  and  in 
other  ways  so  many  gratifying  assurances  that  it 
met  the  needs  of  the  particular  class  of  minds  for 
which  it  was  written  that  I  have  thought  best  to 
reproduce  it  in  its  entirety,  with  the  exception  of 
some  unimportant  changes,  although  it  anticipates, 
in  a  measure,  some  positions  which  are  more  fully 
considered  later  on. 


CONTENTS 


Chjlptbr 

I.  The  Rationaxity  of  Faith 

n.  Evolution  and  Theism      .... 

III.  The  Ethical  Background  of  Nature 

IV.  Inductive  Theism 

V.  CHRISTL4.N  SuPERNATURALISM 

VI.  A  Study  of  Human  Testimony 

Vn.  Inspiration 

VIII.  Dogmatic  Christianity     .... 

IX.  The  Incarnation 

X.  The  Atonement 

XI.  Justification  by  Faith  (Psychological) 

Xn.  Justification  by  Faith  (Practical) 

Xin.  Love  and  Service  (Foreign  Missions) 

Index  


Pagb 
1 

28 
52 
79 
105 
141 
175 
203 
230 
263 
288 
312 
336 
373 


THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF 
ORTHODOXY 


CHAPTER  I 

•  THE  RATIONALITY  OF  FAITH 

Two  characteristic  features  of  modern  scientific 
thought  are  worthy  of  special  notice.  One  is  its 
idea  of  what  constitutes  proof ;  the  other  is  the 
peculiar  attitude  of  mind  it  requires  on  the  part 
of  all  who  would  use  its  methods  for  the  advance- 
ment of  knowledge.  The  definition  of  proof  which 
it  would  seem  to  have  adopted  is,  "  Such  a  degree 
of  evidence  as  will  necessitate  conviction  in  any- 
intelligent  mind."  Thus,  one  of  the  golden  rules 
of  Descartes  is,i  "  Give  unqualified  assent  to  no 
propositions  but  those  the  truth  of  which  is  so 
clear  and  distinct  that  they  cannot  be  doubted." 
Of  the  same  tenor  is  Professor  Huxley's  message 
to  the  youthful  student  of  science  :  "  Tell  him 
that  it  is  his  duty  to  doubt  until  he  is  compelled 
by  the  absolute  authority  of  nature  to  believe  that 
which  is  written  in  books."  These  quotations  will 
also  serve  to  indicate  in  what  attitude  of  mind 
the  scientists  woidd  have  the  search  for  truth  con- 
1  T.  H.  Huxley,  Essays  Selected,  etc.     (Macmillan  &  Co.,  1871.) 


2      THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

ducted  ;  as  wiU  also  Mr.  Lecky's  observation  :  "  To 
raise  the  requisite  standard  of  proof,  to  inculcate 
hardness  and  slowness  of  belief,  is  the  first  task  of 
the  inductive  reasoner.  He  looks  with  favor  on  the 
condition  of  suspended  judgment ;  he  encourages 
men  rather  to  prolong  than  to  abridge  it."  And 
the  views  set  forth  in  the  above  excerpts  find  a  logi- 
cal resultant  in  an  opinion  expressed  some  years 
ago  by  a  writer  in  the  "  Contemporary  Review," 
to  the  effect  that  they  who  have  not  the  time  or 
the  ability  to  investigate  have  no  right  to  believe. 

It  is  not  easy  to  find  fault  with  either  of  the 
positions  which  science  thus  occupies.  Mathe- 
matical reasoning  has  long  been  regarded  as  the 
ideal  method  of  establishing  conclusions  because 
perversity  itself  cannot  call  in  question  its  results. 
The  inductive  reasoner  also  points  to  a  body  of 
truth  built  up  by  his  methods  which  is  almost,  if 
not  quite,  as  far  beyond  the  reach  of  doubt  as  a 
theorem  in  geometry.  He  has  thus  shown  that 
the  conception  of  proof  furnished  by  mathematics 
is  practical  as  well  as  ideal,  and  that  it  may  be 
realized  in  other  sciences  than  that  of  quantity. 
He  knows,  too,  that  every  belief  which  is  not 
strictly  necessary  must  be  due,  in  some  degree,  to 
a  volition  and  is  consequently,  to  that  extent,  an 
assumption.  He  is  not,  therefore,  to  be  censured 
if  he  gives  the  name  of  proof  only  to  that  degree 
of  evidence  which  makes  doubt  impossible,  if  he  is 
inclined  to  regard  as  unscientific  all  convictions 
which  are  in  any  measure  voluntary. 


THE  RATIONALITY  OF  FAITH  3 

But  if  so  much  is  conceded,  if  it  is  admitted 
that  a  proposition  cannot  be  regarded  as  proved,  in 
the  highest  sense  of  the  word,  until  assent  cannot 
be  withheld  from  it  even  by  prejudice  itself,  then 
the  inference  is  not  to  be  denied  that  the  himian 
mind,  while  engaged  in  the  pursuit  of  knowledge, 
should  be  characterized  by  hardness  and  slowness 
of  belief,  that  its  attitude  should  be  as  long  as 
possible  one  of  suspended  judgment ;  for  evidence 
cannot  be  known  to  be  irresistible  until  unbelief 
has  given  way  in  a  determined  effort  to  resist  it. 
Only  when  a  man  is  convinced,  as  it  were,  in  spite 
of  himself,  can  he  feel  any  well-grounded  assurance 
that  his  conviction  rests  on  a  foundation  of  genuine 
proof. 

There  would  be  no  disposition  on  the  part  of 
the  Christian  Church  to  criticise  unfavorably  these 
two  scientific  principles  if  they  were  applied  only 
in  the  pursuit  of  natural  knowledge.  But  it  is 
impossible,  even  if  it  were  desirable,  to  restrict  the 
use  of  them  to  particular  fields  of  inquiry.  Chris- 
tianity  has  a  message  for  students  of  nature  as 
well  as  for  other  men,  and  its  imperative  command, 
"  Believe,"  is  sure  to  evoke  from  them  the  retort, 
"  Prove  so  that  we  cannot  but  believe."  Nor  can 
science  act  here  only  on  the  defensive  and  be  true 
to  itself.  If  it  is  working  in  the  only  way  in 
which  valid  beliefs  are  to  be  had,  it  must  and 
ought  to  be  aggressive.  It  cannot  be  faitliful  to 
its  mission  if  it  does  not  scrutinize  the  supports  of 
religious  as  weU  as  of  secular  opinion,  and  insist 


4      THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

tliat  Christianity  itself  shall  abandon  all  claim  to 
scientific  recognition,  or  produce  in  its  defense 
reasons  which  will  establish  its  truth  beyond  all 
question. 

And,  in  meeting  such  a  challenge,  it  will  not  be 
enough  for  theologians  to  show  that  there  is,  on 
the  whole,  a  presumption  in  favor  of  the  truth  of 
their  rehgion,  or  even  that  Christianity  is  probably 
true.  Presumptions  and  probabilities  cannot  be 
received  by  the  man  of  science  as  equivalent  to 
proof.  They  may  be  well  enough  in  their  place, 
but  not  until  they  have  developed  into  certainties 
which  even  prejudice  cannot  rationally  deny  to  be 
such,  will  he  or  can  he  consistently  deem  them 
worthy  of  unqualified  assent  and  unhesitating  con- 
fidence. 

Now  here  arise  some  important  inquiries  which 
need  to  be  soberly  and  candidly  considered.  Is 
Christianity  susceptible  of  that  degree  of  proof 
which  is  thus  demanded  ?  Are  its  objective  evi- 
dences, that  is,  its  evidences  which  are  universally 
available,  of  so  convincing  a  nature  that  religious 
doubt  must  disappear  from  every  mind  by  which 
they  are  examined  without  prejudice  ?  Are  the 
stock  arguments  of  our  theological  schools  of  such 
a  character  that  we  must  deem  every  man  either 
irrational  or  insincere  who  shall  fail  to  be  con- 
vinced by  them  ?  In  a  word,  are  we  justified  in 
adopting  the  view  of  faith  set  forth  by  President 
Hopkins  1  years  ago  and  regarding  it  merely  as  an 
1  Evidences  of  Christianity,  p.  21. 


THE  RATIONALITY  OF  FAITH  B 

inevitable  result  of  a  candid  attention  to  evidence 
which  to  an  impartial  mind  will  have  all  the  force 
of  a  demonstration  ? 

For  my  own  part  I  do  not  hesitate  to  answer 
all  of  these  questions  in  the  negative.  If  the 
scientists  have  the  right  idea  of  proof,  Christianity 
presents  itself  to  no  man  at  the  outset  as  a  religion 
that  is  proved.  If  they  have  truly  described  the 
attitude  of  mind  in  which  it  is  to  be  investigated, 
it  is  not  likely  to  be  proved. 

In  support  of  the  first  assertion  it  may  be  stated 
that  the  familiar  arguments  for  the  existence  of 
God  are  incumbered  with  serious  objections.  The 
a  'priori  arguments  assume  without  proof  that  cer- 
tain mental  concepts  imply  the  existence  of  corre- 
sponding objective  reahties.  The  argument  from 
causation  is  open  to  the  criticism  that  it  makes  the 
First  Cause  itself  an  effect.  The  argument  from 
design  —  the  only  one  which  Mr.  Mill  ^  regarded 
as  of  any  value  whatever  —  can  furnish  at  the 
best,  according  to  that  writer,  only  a  strong  prob- 
ability, and  is  weakened,  in  his  opinion,  by  the 
possibilit}^  that  the  theory  of  evolution  may  be 
established.  Only  a  few  years  after  he  had  so 
expressed  himself  that  theory  had  come  to  be  re- 
garded as  sound  by  a  large  part  of  the  thinking 
world,  and  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  Mr.  MlQ, 
if  he  had  lived,  wovdd  have  reduced  accordingly 
still  more  his  estimate  of  the  evidential  value  of 
the  argument  mentioned.     The  proof  from  expe- 

^  Three  Essays  on  Religion. 


6      THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

rience  requires  time,  and  can  be  had,  as  a  rule, 
only  by  those  who  are  willing  to  take  for  granted 
at  the  start  that  which  it  is  sought  to  prove. 

The  evidence  for  the  immortality  of  the  soul,  in 
the  opinion  of  Rev.  F.  W.  Robertson,^  although 
valuable  in  the  way  of  suggestiveness,  is  yet,  apart 
from  revelation,  worth  nothing  in  the  way  of  proof ; 
and  the  doctrine,  according  to  Bishop  Butler,^ 
even  when  the  existence  of  God  is  conceded,  is 
proved  only  "  to  a  very  considerable  degree  of 
probability."  Nor  do  the  representatives  of  the 
Society  for  Psychical  Research  who  have  pub- 
lished the  results  of  its  latest  investigations  profess 
to  have  established  the  existence  of  disembodied 
spirits  beyond  all  controversy.  If  it  becomes  in 
any  measure  a  matter  of  doubt  whether  the  exist- 
ence of  God  can  be  proved,  then  it  becomes  more 
than  ever  doubtful  whether  Hume's  celebrated 
argument  against  the  credibility  of  the  Christian 
miracles  has  been  answered,  inasmuch  as  the  only 
replies  to  it  now  held  to  be  satisfactory  take  the 
existence  of  God  for  granted.  In  the  belief  in 
God  and  his  miraculous  interpositions  in  the  affairs 
of  men  is  involved  the  belief  in  a  supernatural 
revelation  and  in  the  resurrection  of  Christ.  If 
confidence  in  these  truths  is  shaken,  the  incarna- 
tion and  the  atonement  become,  in  a  proportionate 
measure,  objects  of  doubt,  while  the  belief  in  re- 
demption and  heaven  becomes,  to  a  similar  degree, 

1  Sermons,  "The  Doubt  of  Thomas." 

2  Analogy,  chap,  i.,  last  paragraph. 


THE  RATIONALITY  OF  FAITH  7 

clouded  with  uncertainty.  I  repeat,  therefore, 
that  if  science  has  the  only  correct  idea  of  proof, 
Christianity,  as  commonly  defined,  is  not  proved 
by  the  objective  evidences  now  adduced  in  its 
behalf. 

It  is  not  enough  to  allege  that  the  objections 
just  suggested  have  been  answered,  for  it  is  cer- 
tainly not  true  that  they  have  been  so  completely 
overthrown  as  to  appear  indubitably  unsound. 
Neither  is  it  pertinent  to  maintain  that  Christian- 
ity in  its  conflicts  with  its  antagonists  has  gained 
an  advantage  over  them ;  for,  even  if  this  statement 
could  be  trusted,  it  is  not  necessarily  true  that 
victory  in  debate  means  the  establishment  of  the 
positions  defended.  If  the  scientific  notion  of  the 
proper  grounds  of  belief  is  correct,  then  belief  in 
Christianity  is  unscientific  until  unbelief  is  impos- 
sible, a  condition  which  cannot  be  perfectly  ful- 
filled so  long  as  its  defenses  can  be  regarded  with 
any  degree  of  weU-founded  suspicion.  And  even 
if  it  be  contended  that  this  condition  is  never  really 
fulfilled  in  the  conclusions  of  science  itself,  yet 
if  the  reasoning  of  the  scientists  approximates 
so  closely  to  their  ideal  of  proof  as  to  reduce  the 
voluntary  element  in  their  beliefs  to  a  minimum, 
the  assertion  just  made  will  stand  ;  for  there  mil 
still  be  in  the  accepted  results  of  science  a  degree 
of  certainty  which  no  balance  of  probability  alleged 
to  exist  on  the  side  of  revealed  religion  is  compe- 
tent to  produce. 

In  defense  of  the  statement  that  Christianity  is 


8      THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

not  likely  to  be  proved  if  it  is  admitted  that  truth 
must  always  be  sought  in  the  attitude  of  mind 
already  described,  let  me  merely  mention  a  few 
corollaries  which  might  be  deduced  from  such 
an  admission:  The  listener  in  the  pew  ought  to 
cultivate  a  spirit  of  intellectual  resistance  to  the 
preacher  in  the  desk.  Conversion  ought  seldom, 
if  ever,  to  follow  immediately  the  hearing  of  the 
Word.  Now  is  the  accepted  time  not  to  believe 
but  to  investigate.  The  dying  skeptic  needs,  not 
exhortations  to  put  his  trust  in  Christ,  but  coj^ious 
extracts  from  works  on  Christian  evidences.  Then, 
too,  doubt  is  often  wholesome.  It  is  a  safeguard 
against  false  opinions,  and  ought  to  be  encouraged 
as  long  as  obstinacy  itseK  can  keep  it  alive.  Min- 
isters ought  not  to  argue  in  behalf  of  the  gospel 
without  indicating  all  that  has  been  or  can  be  said 
on  the  other  side.  The  works  of  able  infidels  ought 
to  be  placed  in  our  Sunday-school  libraries  and  in 
the  rooms  of  our  Young  Men's  Christian  Associa- 
tions. Every  one  who  has  been  converted  without 
having  learned  what  objections  the  skeptics  urge 
against  his  religion  ought  to  familiarize  himself 
with  them  at  once.  He  ought  to  assume  a  state  of 
suspended  judgment,  and  to  believe  again  only  after 
he  has  labored  faithfully  but  fruitlessly  to  doubt. 
Paine,  Eenan,  and  Strauss  should  share  impartially 
with  the  Bible  his  attention.  Some  disciple  of  the 
late  Colonel  IngersoU  should  be  invited  to  labor  in 
conjunction  with  every  revivalist  or  praying-band. 
If  the  truth  of  Christianity  must  be  established  by 


THE  RATIONALITY  OF  FAITH  9 

argument,  there  should  be  fairness  in  the  discus- 
sion, and  both  sides  ought  to  have  an  impartial 
hearing.  If,  as  Professor  Huxley  asserts, ^  there  is 
but  one  kind  of  knowledge  and  but  one  method 
of  acquiring  it,  then  religion  ought  to  form  no 
exception  to  his  remark  that  skepticism  is  the 
highest  of  duties,  blind  faith  the  one  unpardonable 
sin. 

Is  it,  then,  too  much  to  maintain  that,  if  the 
search  for  truth  can  be  rationally  conducted  on  no 
other  principles  than  those  which  are  approved  by 
science,  Christianity  has  not  been  and  is  not  likely 
to  be  proved  ?  Is  it  too  much  to  assert  that  its 
objective  evidences  are  not  strong  enough  to  ban- 
ish all  doubt  of  its  truth  from  every  intelligent 
mind  that  is  resolved  to  doubt  as  long  as  possible  ? 
But  every  one  who  contends  that  theology  at  the 
outset  rests  on  rational  foundations  as  strong  as 
those  of  science,  and  that  Christianity  ought  to  be 
accepted  because  it  can  be  proved  in  advance  of 
experience  to  be  true,  must  submit  his  reasoning 
to  the  scientific  tests  already  named ;  for,  in  that 
case,  they  are  sound.  If  the  intellectual  evidences 
of  Christianity  are  sufficient  to  demonstrate  the 
truth  of  it,  then  they  are  strong  enough  to  neces- 
sitate belief  in  the  most  resolutely  skeptical  mind. 
If,  as  President  Hopkins  ^  asserted,  God  "  asks  no 
one  to  believe  except  on  the  ground  of  evidence," 
then  either  Christianity  is  incredible,  or  else  he  is 

1  Lay  Sermons,  p.  18.     (D.  Appleton  &  Co.,  1870.) 

2  Evidences  of  Christianity,  p.  21. 


10    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

correct  and  self-consistent  in  asserting  that  the 
evidence  of  its  truth  is  as  convincing  as  that  for 
the  forty-seventh  proposition  of  Euclid,  and,  if 
candidly  examined,  must  be  believed.  But  if  it  is 
less  conclusive  than  this,  then  the  inference  cannot 
be  resisted  that  faith  in  Christianity  must  be  to 
some  extent  voluntary,  and  therefore,  to  the  same 
extent,  an  assumption. 

But  now  arises  the  inquiry,  if  we  concede  that 
Christianity  cannot  be  proved  —  at  least  at  the  out- 
set —  in  the  highest  sense  of  the  term,  do  we  not 
make  a  complete  surrender  to  our  enemies  ?  If  we 
admit  that  intelligent  men  may  honestly  fail  to  be 
convinced  by  the  ordinary  Christian  evidences,  must 
we  not  retreat  in  confusion  from  the  field  of  dis- 
cussion ?  By  no  means.  If  some  Christian  apolo- 
gists have  made  a  serious  mistake  in  overrating  the 
rational  supports  of  their  religion,  those  scientists 
who  have  attacked  their  faith  have  made  a  graver 
one  in  practically  forgetting  that  evidence  which 
is  too  weak  to  be  called  proof  may  yet  be  strong 
enough  to  justify  action.  Because  the  hostile 
critics  are  preeminently  men  of  study  and  reflec- 
tion, they  seem  in  many  cases  to  have  lost  sight  of 
the  fact  that  the  affairs  of  practical  life  must  be 
conducted  on  principles  widely  different  from  those 
on  which  scientific  knowledge  is  now  pursued. 

A  mechanic  may  say,  "  I  believe  I  can  invent 
a  machine  that  wiU  do  a  certain  work."  On 
what  does  he  ground  that  conviction?  Probably 
on   nothing,  at   first,  more    convincing   than   his 


THE  RATIONALITY  OF  FAITH  U 

knowledge  of  his  own  ingenuity  and  his  recollec- 
tion of  some  earlier  mechanical  successes.  It  is 
quite  likely  that  he  has  as  yet  no  notion  whatever 
of  the  particular  way  in  which  he  will  carry  out 
his  idea.  Shall  we  therefore  say  to  him,  "  You 
have  no  right  to  your  belief ;  it  is  an  unjustifiable 
assumption,  resting  on  the  scantiest  evidence; 
you  ought  to  distrust  such  baseless  opinions  and 
guard  yourself  resolutely  against  the  tendency  to 
put  confidence  in  what  has  not  been  proved  "  ? 
Such  advice  would  be  equivalent  to  an  admonition 
to  invent  no  more.  He  must  believe  that  he  can 
do  what  he  is  seeking  to  do,  otherwise  he  will  lack 
the  courage  to  attempt  to  do  it ;  for  twenty  years 
or  more  may  elapse  before  he  can  bring  his  ma- 
chine to  that  degree  of  perfection  which  will  justify 
him  in  saying,  "  My  faith  in  my  ability  to  do 
what  I  proposed  is  justified  by  evidence  which  is 
perfectly  conclusive." 

A  capitalist  determines  to  employ  his  wealth  in 
building  a  factory  in  order  to  increase  his  income. 
He  does  so  because  he  believes  that  the  under- 
taking wiU  succeed.  But  is  his  belief  founded  on 
irresistible  evidence  ?  By  no  means.  He  has  his 
misgivings  and  anxieties.  He  has  acquaintances, 
perhaps,  who  predict  that  his  scheme  will  mis- 
carry. Are  we  then  to  counsel  him  to  distrust  his 
convictions  until  he  knows  that  they  are  sound? 
That  would  be  virtually  to  advise  him  to  give  up 
his  project  altogether,  for  it  is  only  his  faith  in 
the  feasibility  of  it  that  gives  him  courage  to  carry 
it  out. 


12    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

Professor  Huxley  compares  the  field  of  scientific 
investigation  to  the  great  ocean  which  stretches 
away  indefinitely  beyond  the  visible  horizon.  One 
cannot  but  think  that  the  illustration  must  have 
suggested  to  him  the  method  by  which  the  world 
learned  the  most  important  fact  that  has  come  to 
its  knowledge  in  modern  times.  How  did  Europe 
discover  that  land  existed  west  of  the  Atlantic 
Ocean?  Not  because  Columbus  maintained  an 
attitude  of  doubt  in  reference  to  the  inconclusive 
arguments  which  could  be  cited  in  support  of  the 
fact,  but  because  he  believed,  on  what  seemed  to 
the  world  the  most  meagre  evidence,  that  India 
could  be  reached  by  sailing  westward.  Had  he 
cherished  the  skeptical  habits  of  thought  inculcated 
by  modern  scientists,  he  would  have  viewed  his 
theories  with  such  doubt  as  must  have  precluded 
him  from  ever  risking  life  and  reputation  for  the 
sake  of  testing  them. 

How  do  men  learn  what  kind  of  business  they 
can  best  succeed  in  ?  How  does  a  student  ascer- 
tain whether  he  is  adapted  to  a  certain  profession  ? 
How  do  apprentices  determine  whether  they  can 
become  successful  mechanics  ?  Not,  certainly,  by 
distrusting  their  own  private  opinions;  not,  cer- 
tainly, by  any  process  of  reasoning  maintained 
against  cultivated  doubts  until  these  disappear  of 
themselves.  Otherwise  they  would  starve  before 
they  would  have  confidence  enough  to  learn  any 
vocation  whatever.  They  simply  assume  that  their 
personal  preferences  are  indicating  to  them  their 


THE  RATIONALITY  OF  FAITH  13 

proper  calling,  and  then  verify  their  assumption  or 
falsify  it,  as  the  case  may  be,  by  the  experience  of 
subsequent  years. 

Thus  it  would  appear  that  convictions  which 
are  sought  merely  to  increase  knowledge,  to  gratify 
curiosity,  may  be  wisely  resisted  until  they  are 
established  by  indubitable  proof,  but  that  those 
which  are  requisite  as  a  ground  of  immediate  action 
may  be  laudably  indulged  on  the  slightest  evi- 
dence, or  perhaps  even  on  none  at  all.  There  is 
such  a  thing  as  enterprise,  the  kernel  of  which  is  a 
willingness  to  take  things  for  granted.  To  assume 
that  what  is  desirable  is  true,  and  then  to  test  the 
assumption  by  acting  as  if  it  were  so,  is  often  the 
only  way  in  which  a  man  can  become  acquainted 
with  his  own  powers  and  give  to  his  Hfe  the  high- 
est possible  success. 

If,  then,  Christianity  is  to  be  regarded  merely 
as  the  best  philosophy  extant,  or  as  a  benevolent 
endeavor  to  convey  to  mankind  additional  religious 
information,  there  is  no  reason  why  it  should  not 
be  thrown  into  the  crucibles  of  modern  thought 
and  tested  by  the  rigid  canons  of  the  inductive 
sciences.  And  even  if  it  claims  to  teach  chiefly  or 
only  for  the  purpose  of  influencing  human  conduct, 
yet  if  it  demands  action  simply  on  the  ground  that 
it  is  already  demonstrated  by  its  evidences  to  be 
true,  it  ought  to  encounter  an  intellectual  resist- 
ance and  a  demand  for  proof  as  determined  and 
exacting  as  are  met  by  any  new  scientific  theory 
which  seeks  to  be  admitted  into  the  category  of 


14    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

established  facts.  In  neither  of  these  cases,  I  am 
convinced,  can  it  expect  to  make  head  against  its 
opponents. 

But  if  it  is  presented  to  men  as  that  which  I 
believe  it  to  be,  as  a  revelation  which  it  is  not 
impossible  at  the  outset  to  doubt,  but  which  can- 
not be  practically  disbelieved  without  injury  to 
the  prospects  of  immortal  souls,  then  it  has  at  least 
as  good  a  claim  to  human  confidence  as  have  the 
convictions  which  stimulate  men  to  work  for  a  life- 
time in  particular  directions  for  position  or  wealth. 
And,  moreover,  since  it  promises  to  those  that 
shall  believe  in  it  additional  evidence  of  its  truth 
in  this  life  and  a  complete  verification  of  itself  in 
the  life  to  come,  it  has  vindicated  its  right  to  be 
received  among  the  practical  working  theories  of 
the  human  race,  theories  in  pursuance  of  which 
men  of  energy  and  push  always  deem  themselves 
justified  in  denying  themselves  and  laboring  for 
an  indefinite  length  of  time  in  the  uncertain  hope 
of  reaping  a  harvest  in  the  end. 

I  conclude,  therefore,  that  the  true  source  of 
religious  confidence  is  not  primarily  the  objective 
Christian  evidences,  but  Christian  experience  ob- 
tained through  a  voluntary  trust  in  the  gospel  when 
doubt  is  possible,  or,  what  is  substantially  the  same 
thing,  by  acting  in  a  state  of  some  uncertainty  as 
if  the  religion  were  known  to  be  true.  In  other 
words,  Christianity  is  offered  to  the  human  race, 
not  as  a  mere  contribution  to  religious  knowledge, 
but  chiefly  as  a  body  of   directions  for  a  moral 


THE  RATIONALITY  OF  FAITH  15 

crisis,  and  is  therefore  to  be  used  like  everytliing 
else  of  the  same  class,  that  is,  it  is  to  be  proved  by 
making  trial  of  it.  "  To  be  indecisive  and  reluc- 
tant to  act,"  says  Mr.  Mill,i  "  because  we  have 
not  evidence  of  a  perfectly  conclusive  character  to 
act  on,  is  a  defect  sometimes  incident  to  scientific 
minds,  but  which,  wherever  it  exists,  renders  them 
unfit  for  practical  emergencies."  Nothing,  to  my 
mind,  could  show  more  plainly  than  does  this  ad- 
mission of  a  candid  thinker  the  true  ground  of 
that  conflict  between  religion  and  science  of  which 
we  hear  so  much  to-day.  It  is  a  conflict  between 
methods  which  are  adapted  to  a  crisis  and  those 
which  are  not.  Human  life,  in  view  of  its  moral 
conditions,  is  a  practical  emergency  ;  the  objective 
evidences  of  Christianity  are  not  of  a  perfectly 
conclusive  character ;  but  to  lay  aside  indecision 
and  reluctance  and  act  as  if  they  were  so  is  the 
one  way  to  become  equal  to  a  crisis  and  to  get  that 
firm  religious  assurance  which  otherwise  will  re- 
main inaccessible. 

And  now,  in  concluding  this  chapter,  let  me 
observe :  — 

1.  It  is  not  implied  in  what  has  just  been  pre- 
sented that  arguments  for  Christianity  and  works 
on  its  evidences  are  useless  or  of  little  value.  The 
word  assumption^  which  I  have  used  so  often,  means 
not  belief  without  evidence,  but  only  belief  on  evi- 
dence which  is  not  demonstrative.  It  denotes 
merely  the  mental  act  by  which  we  decide  that  a 
1  Logic,  8th  ed.,  p.  417.    (Harper  &  Brothers,  1879.) 


16    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

proposition  is  true  when  there  is  any  ground  what- 
ever to  suppose  that  it  may  not  be  so.  The  boy 
who  must  leap  across  a  wide  stream  will  naturally 
search  for  the  narrowest  part  of  it,  although  he 
knows  that  even  there  he  must  risk  a  spring.  What 
are  commonly  called  the  proofs  of  Christianity  may 
serve  to  make  faith  easier  even  though  they  can 
never  make  unbelief  impossible.  The  transfer  of 
a  soul  from  intelligent  doubt  to  religious  confidence 
will  always  be  effected  by  a  leap  into  the  unknown, 
by  an  act  of  voluntary  trust  in  doctrines  which  can 
easily  be  made  to  appear  in  some  degree  uncer- 
tain ;  but  the  length  of  the  leap,  the  difficulty  of 
the  trust,  may  be  indefinitely  diminished  in  most 
minds  by  the  aid  of  the  Christian  evidences. 

2.  This  method  of  obtaining  religious  certainty 
is  ennobling.  It  does  for  man  in  relation  to  his 
spiritual  concerns  what  the  uncertainty  which  over- 
hangs the  future  does  for  him  in  reference  to  liis 
secular  interests,  —  it  stimulates  enterprise.  No 
man  is  likely  to  make  much  headway  in  life  who  is 
not  willing  sometimes  to  incur  the  risk  of  failure 
and  disappointment.  No  one  who  will  not  hazard 
a  step  in  any  direction  until  he  knows  in  advance 
just  where  it  will  land  him  has  in  him  any  of  the 
essential  qualities  of  the  hero.  Christianity  would 
have  men  act  in  spiritual  matters  on  the  same 
principles  which  must  underlie  their  conduct  if 
they  are  to  be  eminently  successful  in  their  tem- 
poral concerns,  —  it  would  have  them  push  out 
boldly  by  faith  into  the  regions  of  uncertainty,  and, 


THE  RATIONALITY  OF  FAITH  17 

for  the  sake  of  moral  profit,  act  as  if  tliey  knew  to 
be  true  some  things  which  they  as  yet  only  expect 
to  find  so.  And  as  no  man  deserves  a  fortune  who 
is  not  willing  to  risk  failure  in  the  pursuit  of  it, 
so  they  judge  themselves  unworthy  of  eternal  life 
who  practically  doubt  its  reality  merely  because 
they  can  see  a  possibility  that  belief  in  it  may  not 
be  sound,  and  who  thus  show  themselves  unwilling 
to  cultivate  moral  enterprise  for  the  sake  of  a  pro- 
spective enlargement  of  their  manhood  and  spirit- 
ual destiny. 

3.  The  view  just  set  forth  is  practical. 

It  is  so,  first,  in  reference  to  the  needs  of  the 
hearers  of  the  Word.  If  Christianity  is  to  be  be- 
lieved only  because  it  can  be  proved,  what  right 
has  any  man  to  become  a  Christian  until  he  sees 
that  it  is  proved,  until  he  is  constrained  to  believe 
after  having  spent  in  study  and  investigation 
the  years  that  will  be  needed  for  him  to  become 
thoroughly  acquainted  with  all  that  can  be  said 
both  for  and  against  it  ?  Since  theology  must 
sometimes  make  use  of  arguments  of  an  exceed- 
ingly abstruse  and  profound  nature,  how  can  it  be 
expected  that  persons  of  limited  mental  capacity 
can  ever  understand  all  of  its  proofs  ?  How  can 
any  generation  be  justified  in  adhering  very  tena- 
ciously to  its  religious  faith  when  theories  which 
threaten  to  undermine  the  intellectual  supports  of 
that  faith  are  matters  of  close  and  doubtful  discus- 
sion ?  Why  is  it  not  best  for  the  man  of  average 
understanding  to  remain  neutral  in  the  great  con- 


18    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

flict  between  belief  and  unbelief  until  the  roar  of 
the  great  guns  has  ceased  and  victory  has  been 
decided  in  favor  of  one  side  or  the  other  ?  Why 
need  Greek  and  Trojan  spend  blood  and  sweat,  if 
the  issues  over  which  they  fight  must  after  all  be 
settled  by  the  gods  who  are  wrangling  over  them 
in  remote  Olympus  ?  Moreover,  how  can  the  gos- 
pel demonstrate  its  truth  in  the  sick  chamber  to  a 
mind  too  weary  to  follow  a  train  of  reasoning? 
Butler's  "  Analogy  "  and  kindred  works  are  long 
tracts  to  read  to  dying  men ;  nevertheless,  they  are 
likely  to  be  too  short  to  remove  the  doubts  of  many 
a  man  who  is  well  versed  in  the  writings  of  the 
modern  skeptics.  If  faith  in  Christ  must  be  pre- 
ceded by  a  demonstration  of  the  truth  of  Christian- 
ity, then  we  may  safely  say  that  it  is  something 
which  many  will  be  precluded,  by  sheer  lack  of  time 
or  abihty,  from  ever  exercising. 

But  if  the  belief  enjoined  in  the  gospel  is  simply 
a  willingness,  in  cases  of  doubt,  to  assume  for  the 
sake  of  moral  gain  that  certain  ethically  improv- 
ing and  not  unreasonable  doctrines  are  true,  then 
it  can  be  exercised  at  any  time  and  by  anybody. 
It  may  be  as  sudden  as  the  choice  which  sent  the 
blind  man  to  the  pool  of  Siloam,  as  the  determina- 
tion sometimes  is  which  transfers  a  boy  from  his 
New  England  home  to  Texas  or  Colorado.  Any 
one  who  has  time  enough  or  wit  enough  to  ask, 
"  What  must  I  do  to  be  saved?  "  is  likely  to  have 
enough  of  both  to  take  for  granted  that  the  prom- 
ises of  Christ  are  true  in  the  hope  of  finding  them 


THE  RATIONALITY  OF  FAITH  19 

so  through  the  test  of  a  subsequent  personal  expe- 
rience. 

And,  again,  the  view  which  I  am  advocating  is 
practical  with  reference  to  the  needs  of  preachers 
also.  It  is  a  good  deal  to  expect,  especially  in 
these  days  of  depleted  theological  seminaries,  that 
every  young  man  who  enters  the  ministry  wiU  be 
able  to  unhorse  with  the  lance  of  argument  every 
steel-clad  champion  of  imbelief  who  may  appear 
in  the  lists  against  him.  "  For  ye  see  your  call- 
ing, brethren,  how  that  not  many  wise  men  after 
the  flesh,  not  many  mighty,  not  many  noble,  are 
called."  David  would  not  have  slain  Goliath  had 
he  been  satisfied  to  leave  to  the  giant  the  choice  of 
weapons.  His  flesh  would  surely  have  been  given 
to  the  fowls  of  the  air  and  to  the  beasts  of  the  field 
had  he  put  his  trust  in  the  cumbrous  armor  which 
Saul  would  have  buckled  upon  him.  The  servant 
of  God  is  likely  to  fare  little  better  who  engages  in 
a  purely  dialectical  combat  with  some  well-read 
scoffer  in  the  belief  that  the  coat  of  mail  which 
has  been  forged  for  him  in  the  seminary  will  effec- 
tually resist  the  two-handed  swords  and  the  bat- 
tle-axes of  modern  infidelity.  Every  disciple  of 
Christ  who  is  called  to  preach  the  gospel  ought 
to  feel  that  he  is  superior,  in  some  particular,  to 
every  possible  antagonist,  and  that  he  is  mider 
no  necessity  of  quitting  the  field  merely  because 
he  has  not  had  time  to  study  logic  or  to  become 
an  expert  in  debate.  If  the  ground  of  faith  is 
antecedent  evidence,  then  every  doubter  has  good 


20    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

cause  to  make  to  many  an  earnest  preacher  of 
the  gospel  the  remark  to  which  I  have  previously- 
referred  :  "  You  have  not  the  time  or  the  ability 
to  investigate  and,  therefore,  have  no  right  to  be- 
lieve." But  if  the  true  source  of  religious  confi- 
dence is  in  the  experimental  verification  of  reh- 
gious  truths  not  antecedently  proved,  then  every 
genuine  evangelist  has  the  right  to  say  to  every  un- 
believer, however  learned  and  able :  "  A  uniform 
condition  of  all  enterprising  action  is  an  assump- 
tion not  yet  demonstrated  to  be  true,  and  I  exhort 
you  to  assume,  for  the  sake  of  your  own  moral 
health  and  growth,  that  Christianity  is  true,  even 
though  you  are  not  wholly  satisfied  with  its  intel- 
lectual supports,  and  to  live  a  life  of  Christian 
seK-denial  and  love  in  the  hope  of  verif3dng  your 
assumption  by  so  doing." 

Philosophical  skepticism  expresses  its  latest 
theological  results  in  the  word  agnosticism^  which 
implies  that  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  religion 
have  not  been  disproved,  but  have  merely  not  been 
proved.  The  preacher  of  the  gospel  has  the  right 
to  say  to  any  one  who  holds  that  position :  "  Since 
you  cannot  show  that  the  words  of  Christ  are 
false,  you  cannot  prove  that  anything  which  con- 
tradicts them  is  true.  Then  give  the  benefit  of  the 
doubt  to  that  which  is  the  more  ennobling.  Take 
for  granted  that  the  gospel  is  divine.  Do  what 
every  one  must  do  who  would  reach  the  fruition  of 
a  stimulating  hope,  —  assume,  in  the  absence  of 
proof  to  the  contrary,  that  the  desirable  is  true, 
and  then  act  as  if  it  were  so." 


THE  RATIONALITY  OF  FAITH  21 

When  Mr.  Mill,^  summing  up  the  results  of 
his  inquiries  concerning  the  immortality  of  the 
soul,  observes,  "  There  is,  therefore,  no  assurance 
whatever  of  a  life  after  death  on  grounds  of  natu- 
ral religion,  but  to  any  one  who  feels  it  conducive 
either  to  his  satisfaction  or  to  his  usefulness  to 
hope  for  a  future  state  as  a  possibility  there  is  no 
hindrance  to  his  indulging  that  hope,"  it  is  not 
necessary  that  each  youthful  prophet,  in  order  to 
neutralize  the  effect  of  that  statement  in  the  mind 
of  some  parishioner,  should  try  to  make  bricks 
without  straw,  should  seek  to  demonstrate  the 
reality  of  the  future  state  beyond  all  possibility  of 
doubt  by  means  of  the  arguments  of  his  theological 
professor  ;  it  will  be  a  much  shorter  and  more 
practical  process  for  him  to  take  the  great  ration- 
alist at  his  word.  He  may  confidently  affirm, 
what  few  would  have  the  hardihood  to  deny,  —  that 
it  is  conducive  to  one's  happiness  and  eminently 
so  to  one's  usefulness  to  hope  for  a  future  state  as 
a  possibility,  and  he  may,  therefore,  exhort  every 
one  who  lacks  that  hope  to  indulge  it,  or,  what  is 
the  same  thing,  to  conduct  himself,  in  all  respects, 
as  if  it  were  sound.  And  so  with  all  the  other 
teachings  of  Christianity  which  the  agnostic  can- 
not controvert,  although  he  is  able,  on  negative 
grounds,  to  withhold  from  them  his  assent,  —  to 
take  for  granted  that  they  are  true  because  they 
have  a  tendency  to  ennoble  him  who  believes  them, 
and  then  to  live  a  life  which  is  appropriate  to 
1  Three  Essays  on  Religion,  p.  210.     (Henry  Holt  &  Co.,  1874.) 


22    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

them,  is  practical  advice  which  may  properly  be 
given  to  the  most  confirmed  doubter.  And  if  so 
much  is  admitted,  then  no  servant  of  God,  however 
clumsy  in  argument  and  ignorant  of  secular  lore, 
need  be  without  the  sling  and  pebbles  which  will 
put  him  on  terms  of  equality  with  the  most  for- 
midable antagonist. 

4.  Finally,  the  view  here  defended  is  scriptural. 
Belief  is  represented  in  the  Bible  as  a  voluntary 
act.  This  fact  was  so  evident  to  the  poet  Shelley  ^ 
that  he  adduced  it  as  a  proof  that  the  gospel  was 
not  divine.  As  a  volition  had,  in  his  opinion,  no 
power  to  create  a  belief,  one  of  the  fundamental 
requirements  of  Christianity  seemed  to  him  irra- 
tional and  absurd.  President  Hopkins,^  taking 
apparently  the  same  view  of  faith,  was  constrained 
to  regard  the  command,  "  Believe,"  as  virtually  a 
direction  to  examine  the  sources  of  belief,  to  study 
the  proofs  of  Christianity. 

But  it  seems  very  clear  to  me  that  "  belief  " 
and  its  synonyms  are  employed  in  the  Scriptures 
in  a  popular  sense  and  one  which  is  in  very  gen- 
eral use  at  the  present  time.  When  a  merchant 
trusts  an  unknown  customer,  when  a  speculator 
has  faith  in  an  uncertain  enterprise,  when  a  man 
believes  a  doubtful  story  related  to  him  by  a 
stranger,  a  volition  is  usually  put  forth,  —  the 
trust,  faith,  or  belief  is  exercised  on  evidence  that 
is  scientifically  insufficient,  and  it  is,  therefore,  to 

^  Notes  to  Queen  Mab. 

2  Evidences  of  Christianity,  pp.  21,  22. 


THE  RATIONALITY  OF  FAITH  23 

a  certain  extent,  an  assumption.  The  merchant 
takes  for  granted  that  his  customer  is  honest,  the 
speculator  takes  for  granted  that  his  venture  will 
succeed,  the  man  takes  for  granted  that  the  tale 
told  to  him  is  true.  To  act,  then,  as  if  a  certain 
thing  were  true  which  cannot  as  yet  be  known  to 
be  so  is  to  believe  in  a  popular,  and  also,  as  I  am 
persuaded,  in  the  scriptural  sense  of  the  word. 

In  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  ^  faith  is  not 
defined  as  an  involuntary  assent  to  propositions 
which  have  been  demonstrated  to  be  true ;  it  is 
"  the  assurance  of  "  (or  "  the  giving  substance  to  ") 
"  things  hoped  for,"  "  the  proving  "  (or  "  test  ") 
"  of  things  not  seen."  Ignorance  and  hope,  rather 
than  unwavering  certainty,  are  thus  declared  to  be 
involved  in  it. 

When  Thomas  refused  to  credit  the  report  of 
the  resurrection  of  Christ  without  ocular  demon- 
stration of  its  truth,  he  only  demanded  the  same 
degree  of  proof  which  the  other  disciples  had  had  ; 
and  if  belief  is  the  acceptance  of  only  such  state- 
ments as  have  been  proved,  he  ought  to  have  been 
commended  as  a  cautious  investigator  who  would 
not  frame  his  verdict  imtil  aU  the  evidence  was  in. 
Yet  Christ  did  not  commend  him,  but  by  prais- 
ing those  who  had  acted  differently,  he  virtually 
censured  him.  When  he  said,  "  Thomas,  because 
thou  hast  seen  me,  thou  hast  believed :  blessed  are 
they  that  have  not  seen,  and  yet  have  believed," 
he  indicated  clearly  enough  that  the  blessings  of 

1  Heb.  xi.  1. 


24    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

Christianity  were  for  those  who  would  have  suffi- 
cient spiritual  ambition  to  put  confidence  in  things 
only  hoped  for  and  to  test  by  a  voluntary  faith 
desirable  things  not  seen,  rather  than  for  those 
who  would  withhold  credence  from  every  stimu- 
lating doctrine  until  an  irresistible  logic  should 
deprive  them  of  the  natural  power  to  doubt,  and 
their  faith,  at  the  same  time,  of  all  ennobling  in- 
fluence. There  is  little  or  nothing  morally  invig- 
orating in  an  act  of  belief  which  is  necessitated  by 
overpowering  evidence  ;  but  to  believe  for  a  praise- 
worthy end  when  doubt  is  easy  is  to  elevate  the 
soul  by  an  act  of  moral  heroism. 

When  Jesus  said,i  "  I  thank  thee,  O  Father, 
Lord  of  heaven  and  earth,  that  thou  didst  hide 
these  things  from  the  wise  and  understanding,  and 
didst  reveal  them  unto  babes,"  he  taught  that  the 
avenue  to  religious  knowledge  leads  not  from  the 
reasoning  powers,  but  from  the  childlike  disposition 
to  take  things  for  granted,  to  receive  things  on 
trust.  And  as  Abraham  in  hope  believed  against 
hope,  and  as  he  went  out  not  knowing  whither  he 
went,  so  every  heir  of  salvation  is  called  upon  to 
put  confidence  in  things  not  known  by  him  to  be 
true  and  against  which  much  that  is  discouraging 
may  be  said. 

If  the  above  considerations  could  leave  any  doubt 
in  any  mind  as  to  the  rationality  of  the  faith 
which  the  Scriptures  enjoin,  that  doubt  must  dis- 
appear when  it  transpires  that  the  mental  process 

1  Matt.  xi.  25. 


THE  RATIONALITY   OF  FAITH  25 

involved,  when  broadly  considered,  is  really  not 
even  unscientific,  and  that  it  is  essentially  indis- 
tinguishable from  that  which  is  carried  on  in  al- 
most any  extensive  induction.  The  first  step  in  the 
search  for  scientific  truth  is  usually  an  hypothesis, 
a  supposition  made  either  without  evidence  or  on 
evidence  avowedly  meagre,  in  order  to  facilitate 
the  drawing  of  right  conclusions.  By  suggesting 
observations  and  experiments  it  puts  the  investi- 
gator on  the  road  to  satisfactory  evidence.  With- 
out assumptions  of  this  kind  science  could  never 
have  attained  its  present  state.  They  are  neces- 
sary steps  in  the  progi^ess  to  something  more  cer- 
tain. Thus,  according  to  Mr.  Mill,  from  whose 
"  Logic  "  1  I  have  quoted  substantially  these  last 
observations,  the  hypothesis  is  an  unproved  as- 
sumption which  is  made  in  the  hope  of  verifying 
it  through  later  mental  action.  Now  Christianity 
may  be  safely  defined  as  an  hypothesis  to  be 
adopted  with  the  expectation  of  establishing  it 
through  subsequent  moral  action.  The  observa- 
tion and  experiments  by  which  the  hypotheses 
of  science  are  tested  have  their  parallel  in  the 
obedience  to  Christ  and  the  resulting  Christian 
experience  through  which  Christian  faith  must  b© 
justified. 

This  method  is  identical  with  that  described  in 
the  fourth  chapter,  by  which  a  knowledge  of  God 
may  be  inductively  attained.     To  accept  provision- 
ally   the    New    Testament    teachings    concerning 
1  Chap.  xiv.  §§  4,  5. 


26    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

Christ  for  the  purpose  of  testing  by  obedience 
their  adaptedness  to  the  highest  conceivable  ends 
of  human  existence  is  surely  legitimate  and  ra- 
tional. Evolution  itself,  although  accepted  by  so 
many  scientific  men,  is  grounded  still,  to  some  ex- 
tent, on  faith.  When  Haeckel  ^  says,  of  course,  it 
"  cannot  be  proved  exactly,"  and  adds,  "  Looking 
forward  to  the  twentieth  century,  I  am  convinced 
that  it  will  universally  accept  our  theory  of  de- 
scent," it  is  very  plain  that  he  regards  the  complete 
demonstration  of  his  theory  as  something  that  is 
yet  below  the  horizon.  If  the  Christian  regards 
his  faith,  not  as  a  substitute  for  scientific  know- 
ledge, but  as  a  means  of  obtaining  this  along  reli- 
gious lines,  he  is  in  harmony  with  the  scientific  spirit. 
He  need  not  even  demur  to  Professor  Huxley's 
dictum  already  quoted,  "  There  is  but  one  kind  of 
knowledge  and  but  one  method  of  acquiring  it," 
save  in  so  far  as  that  method  involves  an  unsym- 
pathetic attitude  towards  a  philanthropic  move- 
ment. In  other  words,  Christianity  may  be  de- 
fined either  as  a  faith  or  as  a  science.  In  the 
former  case,  it  makes  no  claim  for  scientific  recog- 
nition, but  is  to  be  classed  with  the  unproved  as- 
sumptions that  underlie  all  practical  life.  In  the 
latter  case,  as  will  be  more  fully  shown  hereafter, 
every  Christian  is  progressively  vindicating  by  his 
religious  experience  its  right,  so  far  as  he  is  con- 
cerned, to  be  received  as  a  scientific  fact.  Investi- 
gators in  other  fields  may  have  no  sympathy  with 
1  Last  Link,  pp.  77,  78.     (Adam  &  Charles  Black,  1898.) 


THE  RATIONALITY  OF  FAITH  27 

his  spiritual  ambitions  and  may  question  the  evi- 
dential value  of  liis  experiences;  but  that  he  is 
seeking  for  truth  and  seeking  for  it  in  a  rational 
way,  they  cannot  deny. 

It  will  be  my  purpose  in  the  following  chapters 
to  show  that  the  stream  which  faith  must  leap  is 
not  too  wide,  or,  in  other  words,  that  the  assump- 
tion with  which  the  Christian  starts  involves  no 
unnatural  break  with  current  knowledge,  that  the 
unknown  element  in  it  does  not  place  it  outside  the 
sphere  of  probability.  And  while  I  deem  it  neither 
possible  nor  desirable  to  demonstrate  the  truth  of 
Cliristianity  without  the  aid  of  a  personal  Christian 
experience,  I  shall  hope  to  be  able  to  show  that 
Christian  faith,  even  when  it  is  so  enlarged  as^to 
include  the  essential  tenets  of  modern  orthodoxy, 
is  not  only  rational  but  also  deserves  at  least  the 
respect  of  even  scientific  men. 


CHAPTER  II 

EVOLUTION   AND    THEISM 

It  would  be  very  difficult  to  convey  an  adequate 
idea  of  the  extent  to  wliicli  the  theory  of  evolution 
has  influenced  the  thought  of  our  time.  Not 
much  more  than  a  generation  has  elapsed  since 
Darwin  published  his  most  celebrated  book,  but  it 
woidd  not  be  easy  to  exaggerate  the  transforma- 
tion it  has  wrought  in  fundamental  conceptions 
and  methods  of  study  in  almost  every  branch  of 
human  knowledge.  It  signalized  the  dawn  of  an 
epoch  which  was  to  divide,  more  sharply  than  al- 
most any  other  that  can  be  named  has  divided, 
the  opinions  of  men  into  the  old  and  the  new. 
The  emigre  who  returned  to  France  after  the 
Revolution  had  spent  its  force  could  hardly  have 
been  more  bewildered  by  the  political  and  social 
changes  which  had  taken  place  in  his  absence  than 
a  scholar  would  be  who  had  lived  apart  from  the 
intellectual  movement  of  the  latter  half  of  the 
nineteenth  century,  and  should  now  seek  to  recog- 
nize in  the  opinions  with  which  modern  thought  is 
saturated  those  that  were  commonly  accepted  in 
his  own  day.  He  would  speedily  realize  that  the 
changes   which   have    occurred  during  this   short 


EVOLUTION  AND  THEISM  29 

time  in  almost  the  whole  system  of  human  beliefs 
well  deserve  to  be  called  revolutionary. 

That  there  are  important  and  even  serious  dis- 
agreements between  the  author  of  "  The  Origin  of 
Species  "  and  some  of  the  acute  and  able  men  who 
are  called  his  disciples  cannot  be  denied.  Wal- 
lace/ who  shares  with  him  the  honor  of  the  original 
discovery,  accords  to  sexual  selection,  on  which 
Darwin  laid  so  much  stress,  a  relatively  low  place 
among  evolutionary  forces.  It  assumes,  in  his  opin- 
ion, too  high  a  development  of  aesthetic  taste  in 
relatively  low  organisms  to  explain,  for  example, 
the  beauty  of  the  peacock's  train  as  the  result  of 
a  discrimination  on  the  part  of  the  female  birds 
which  caused  them  to  choose  their  mates  on 
account  of  minute  differences  in  the  forms,  colors, 
and  patterns  of  their  plumes.  He  is  obliged,  there- 
fore, to  enlarge  the  original  hypothesis  by  intro- 
ducing new  agencies  to  accoimt  for  the  very  impor- 
tant class  of  facts  just  suggested. 

Nor  does  he  ^  attribute  the  mental  and  moral 
development  of  the  human  race  exclusively  or  even 
primarily  to  the  Darwinian  law.  The  theory  that 
no  function  or  quality  can  be  evolved  or  even  sur- 
vive in  any  organism  unless  it  proves  advantageous 
to  its  possessor  in  the  struggle  for  existence  is 
rudely  jostled,  as  he  conceives,  by  such  phenomena 
as  the  capacity  to  form  ideal  conceptions  of  space 
and  time,  intense  artistic  feelings  of  pleasure  in 

1  Darwinism,  p.  294.     (Macmillan  &  Co.,  1889.) 

2  Contributions,  to  the  Theory  of  Natural  Selection,  p.  351.    (Mac- 
millan &  Co.,  1870.) 


30    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

form  and  color  and,  I  suppose,  abnormal  self-denial 
or  moral  heroism.  These  have  not  only  not  tended 
to  aid  in  the  battle  of  life  those  who  had  them,  but 
the  qualities  last  named  have  had  only  too  often 
precisely  the  opposite  effect. 

Dr.  Romanes,  who  has  been  caUed  "  almost  the 
most  prominent  of  Darwin's  successors,"  has  sup- 
plemented the  theory  of  his  distinguished  leader 
by  that  of  physical  selection,  that  is,  of  "  the  oc- 
currence, accidentally  or  from  unknown  causes,  of 
reproductive  changes  which  render  certain  individ- 
uals of  a  species  infertile  with  others."  "  This 
is  reaUy  an  inversion  of  Darwinism  "  (Dawson). i 
Both  he  and  Wallace  claim  to  be  orthodox  Dar- 
winians, yet  each  accuses  the  other  of  heresy. 

But  a  far  more  serious  divergence  of  view  took 
place  when  Weismann  denied  that  acquired  char- 
acteristics are  inherited.  It  had  been  taken  for 
granted  previously  by  Darwin  and  most  of  his  fol- 
lowers, not  only  that  a  variation  which  had  proved 
useful  to  an  organism  would  receive  advantageous 
increments  in  the  struggle  for  existence,  but  that 
these  would  also  be  likely  to  be  transmitted  to 
some  of  its  descendants,  and,  in  this  way,  to  be 
perpetuated  and  indefinitely  improved.  But  when 
Weismann  affirmed  that  there  was  not  to  be  found 
a  single  unquestionable  case  of  the  transmission  of 
acquired  peculiarities  to  offspring,  and  that  natural 
selection  must  be  defended  without  the  aid  of  the 
assumption  which  he  had  thus  negatived,  it  is  evi- 

^  Johnson's  Encyclopaedia^  1897,  art.  "  Evolution." 


EVOLUTION  AND  THEISM  31 

dent  that  lie  laid  down  a  proposition  of  no  ordinary- 
importance.  Herbert  Spencer  declared  that  its 
acceptance  must  prove  fatal  to  the  theory  which  it 
supplemented.  And  Haeckel  ^  says :  "  I  agree  with 
Spencer  in  the  conviction  that  progressive  heredity 
is  an  indispensable  factor  in  every  true  monistic 
theory  of  evolution,  and  that  it  is  one  of  the  most 
important  elements.  If  one  denies  with  Weis- 
mann  the  heredity  of  acquired  characters,  then  it 
becomes  necessary  to  have  recourse  to  purely  mys- 
tical qualities  of  germ  plasm.  I  am  of  the  opinion 
of  Spencer,  that,  in  that  case,  it  would  be  better 
to  accept  a  mysterious  creation  of  all  the  various 
species  as  described  in  the  Mosaic  account."  Al- 
though the  Weismannian  theory  of  descent  is 
probably  to  be  considered  as  overthrown,  yet  accord- 
ing to  Komanes^  (1895),  the  question  as  to  the 
transmission  of  acquired  characteristics  is  still  open, 
and  must  be  settled  by  further  observation  and  the 
collation  of  additional  facts. 

It  would  thus  appear  that  the  theory  of  evolu- 
tion has  itself  been  developing  in  harmony  with 
its  own  principles.  It  has  branched  out  already 
into  several  species,  into  a  number  of  differ- 
ent hypotheses,  each  one  of  which  is  associated 
with  some  prominent  name  or  names.  Wallace, 
Darwin,  Mivart,  Romanes,  Weismann,  and  others, 
represent  so  many  more  or  less  divergent  concep- 
tions of  the  influence  to  be  ascribed   to    natural 

1  Last  Link,  p.  276. 

2  Darwin  and  after  Darwin,  p.  41.  (Open  Court  Pub.  Co.,  1894.) 


32    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

selection,  among  which  a  veritable  struggle  for  ex- 
istence is  going  on  with  the  not  improbable  result 
that  aU  of  them  will  be  largely  modified,  if  some 
of  them  do  not  disappear  altogether. 

But  the  theory  itself,  nevertheless,  is  doubtless 
to  be  reckoned  among  the  permanent  acquisitions 
of  human  thought.  Although  there  are  important 
residuary  phenomena  which  have  not  as  yet  been 
brought  into  full  harmony  with  it,  although  some 
of  its  leading  advocates  hold  wide  differences  of 
opinion  as  to  the  validity  of  some  of  its  postulates, 
although  it  is  constrained  to  fill  up  gaps  in  its  de- 
fenses with  assumptions  and  guesses  in  anticipation 
of  further  discoveries,  it  seems  to  have  been  accepted 
by  a  large  majority  of  intelligent  men  as  at  least 
probably  true,  even  though  they  may  not  claim 
that  it  has  been  scientifically  established.  Accord- 
ing to  Haeckel,!  "  We  are  justified  in  affirming 
that  the  descent  of  man  from  an  extinct  tertiary 
series  of  Primates  is  not  a  vague  hypothesis  but  an 
historical  fact."  And  again,^  "  Looking  forward 
to  the  twentieth  century,  I  am  convinced  that  it 
will  universally  accept  our  theory  of  descent,  and 
that  future  science  will  regard  it  as  the  greatest 
advance  made  in  our  time."  And  Jolm  Fiske^ 
writes  regarding  man's  descent  from  prior  animal 
forms  :  "  There  is  no  more  reason  for  supposing 
that  this  conclusion  will  ever  be  gainsaid  than  for 
supposing  that  the  Copernican  astronomy  wiU  some 

1  Last  Link,  p.  76.  2  jj;^.^  p.  73. 

8  Destiny  of  Man,  p.  20.     (Houghton,  Mifflin  &  Co.,  1887.) 


EVOLUTION  AND  THEISM  33 

time  be  overthrown,  and  the  concentric  spheres 
of  Dante's  heaven  be  reinstated  in  the  minds  of 
men." 

Whether  the  influence  or  agency  suggested 
by  the  phrases  "  natural  selection,"  "  struggle  for 
existence,"  "  survival  of  the  fittest,"  etc.,  wiU 
ever  be  unquestioningly  received  as  accounting  for 
all  the  phenomena  of  organic  and  mental  devel- 
opment may  well  be  doubted.  As  has  been 
shown  already,  it  is  not  so  received  by  some  of  the 
most  prominent  evolutionists  at  the  present  time. 
When  such  a  man  as  Haeckel  admits  that  com- 
plete proof  of  it  has  not  yet  been  obtained,  and 
pleads  for  the  adoption  of  the  theory  on  the 
ground  that  there  is  no  other  that  can  be  opposed 
so  effectively  to  the  theory  of  special  creations, 
it  certainly  does  not  appear  that  the  supports  of 
the  original  hypothesis  have  all  the  strength  that 
some  might  desire. 

Still,  the  theory  of  evolution,  when  broadly 
defined  and  considered  in  its  largest  outlines,  has 
secured  a  tenacious  hold  on  the  human  mind. 
As  has  been  the  case  with  most  ideas  that  have 
obtained  a  large  following  in  a  brief  space  of  time, 
a  place  seems  to  have  been  previously  prepared  for 
it  into  which  it  was  recognized  as  aptly  fitting. 
As  the  Keformation  spread  with  unexampled 
rapidity  because  Luther  expressed  distinctly  what 
was  already  vaguely  existent  in  many  minds,  so 
Darwin  and  Wallace  owe  the  quick  popularity 
which   their  theory  achieved   to   the  fact  that  it 


34    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

explained  and  generalized  to  many  a  mind  its 
own  detached  observations  and  surmises.  Chemi- 
cal solutions  are  sometimes  so  near  to  the  point  of 
crystallization  that  only  the  introduction  of  a  crys- 
tal of  the  right  kind  is  needed  in  order  to  precipi- 
tate the  process.  So  the  human  mind  had  doubt- 
less been  prepared  by  previous  questionings  and 
an  acquaintance  with  many  isolated  phenomena  for 
some  fact  or  plausible  theory  which  would  combine 
at  once  its  disconnected  fragments  of  knowledge 
into  a  self-consistent  and  intelligible  whole.  The 
reason  given  by  a  character  in  a  recent  famous 
novel  for  accepting  Darwinism, "  It  accounts  for 
things,  you  know,"  ^  suggests  a  peculiar  attractive- 
ness that  inheres  in  the  theory,  and  explains,  no 
doubt,  much  of  the  readiness  with  which  it  has 
been  accepted  by  a  large  part  of  the  thinking 
world. 

But  however  this  may  be,  the  theory  itself  has 
been  influencing,  modifying,  and  training  human 
thought  now  for  more  than  a  generation.  It  has 
been  accustoming  human  minds  to  think  along  the 
lines  marked  out  by  it.  And  in  these  facts  lies 
a  special  promise  of  its  continuance.  It  may  be 
safely  taken  for  granted  that  the  philosophy,  the 
educational  methods,  the  practical  philanthropy 
of  the  future  will  be  shaped  by  a  recognition  of 
development  as  the  keynote  of  all  progress.  A 
definite  direction  has  been  given  to  human  thought 
by  Darwin  and  his  compeers  wliich  has  become, 

1  Trilby. 


EVOLUTION  AND  THEISM  35 

as  it  were,  a  second  nature.  It  will  be  not  merely 
customary  but  natural  and  easy  for  men,  in  time 
to  come,  as  indeed  it  already  is  in  our  own  day, 
to  investigate  and  explain  all  social,  political,  and 
other  movements  in  the  light  of  and  in  harmony 
with  the  fundamental  facts  of  evolution. 

That  the  new  theory  would  antagonize  many 
previous  religious  and  theological  conceptions  was 
to  be  expected.  The  human  mind  is,  in  a  certain 
general  sense,  consistent  with  itself;  that  is,  its 
customary  modes  of  thought  in  one  sphere  of 
knowledge  will  be  likely  to  be  followed  in  every 
other  with  which  it  has  to  do.  It  wiU  carry  its 
own  individuality  with  it  everywhere.  A  revolu- 
tion of  ideas  which  is  radical  enough  to  establish 
development  as  the  governing  principle  in  one 
class  of  phenomena  must  extend  to  every  other. 
The  new  movement  has  made  itself  felt  in  the 
province  of  natural  religion.  It  has  influenced 
the  higher  criticism  of  the  Christian  Scriptures. 
It  has  profoimdly  modified  the  interpretation  of 
the  Biblical  histories.  The  results  are  largely 
such  as  must  be  produced  by  the  investigations  of 
men  who  have  come  under  the  influence  of  a  new 
point  of  view.  The  mental  character  of  these  men 
has  been  changed,  and  their  opinions  and  conclu- 
sions along  the  Hues  referred  to  have  been  corre- 
spondingly affected. 

That  the  theory  in  question  is  in  serious  conflict 
with  any  intelligent  form  of  Christianity  is  not 
now  generally  apprehended.     That  it  is  practically 


36    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

independent  of  the  processes  by  whicli  religious 
convictions  are  gained  and  theological  creeds  are 
adopted  has  been  fuUy  demonstrated.  It  did  not 
prevent  Eomanes  from  returning  to  the  faith  of 
his  early  manhood ;  it  did  not  keep  Wallace  from 
becoming  a  spiritist.  A  modification  of  it  was 
held  by  Mivart  without  apparently  weakening  for 
a  quarter  of  a  century  his  confidence  in  the  teach- 
ings of  the  Koman  Catholic  Church.  And  there 
are  few,  if  any,  greater  names  than  these  among  the 
adherents  and  defenders  of  the  new  philosophy. 
Moreover,  it  is  accepted,  without  any  resulting  loss 
of  religious  enthusiasm,  by  many  of  the  most  prom- 
inent theologians  and  preachers  of  the  Christian 
Church. 

Nor  is  it  inconsistent  with  the  most  obvious  teach- 
ings of  the  Bible  in  regard  to  the  origin  of  ani- 
mate creation  and  the  development  of  the  human 
species.  On  the  contrary,  the  Book  of  Genesis, 
it  would  seem,  ought  to  have  suggested  long  ago 
some  of  the  principles  on  which  Darwin  lays  so 
much  stress.  Without  attaching  undue  impor- 
tance to  the  so-caUed  Mosaic  account  of  the  crea- 
tion, or  citing  from  it  anything  more  than  the 
undeniable  fact  that,  so  far  as  it  goes,  it  clearly 
recognizes  the  successive  appearance  of  organic 
types  on  the  earth  in  an  ascending  series,  it  is 
quite  obvious  that  the  primitive  man  whom  it 
describes  belongs  to  a  very  low  order  of  being. 

Professor  Huxley  attacked  the  Biblical  cosmo- 
gony  through   the    Miltonic    paraphrase  of  it  in 


EVOLUTION  AND  THEISM  37 

«'  Paradise  Lost,"  very  much  as  it  has  been  and  in 
some  countries  may  still  be  the  custom  to  evade 
the  political  postulate  that  the  king  can  do  no 
wrong  by  denouncing  his  acts  as  those  of  his  chief 
advisers.  The  learned  palaeontologist,  however, 
was  at  no  pains  to  conceal  the  fact  that  he  re- 
garded the  two  accounts  as  substantially  the  same. 
But  that  Milton's  picture  of  Adam,  with  his  higlily 
developed  moral  and  intellectual  nature,  has  any- 
thing in  common  with  the  First  Man  of  the  Bible, 
whose  rudimentary  conscience  failed  to  secure 
from  him  obedience  to  a  command  which  was 
suited  to  the  moral  development  of  an  infant,  and 
whose  knowledge  of  art  was  not  seemingly  equal 
to  the  task  of  making  his  own  clothing,  would 
hardly  have  become  a  connnon  belief  but  for  the 
influence  of  the  great  poet  combined  with  that  of 
certain  theological  tenets  which  are  supposed  to 
depend  on  such  a  belief.  It  is  not  impossible, 
also,  that  interpretation  here  may  have  been  biased 
by  survivals  of  the  old  Pagan  tendency  to  date  the 
golden  age  of  human  existence  at  the  beginning 
of  human  history. 

And  the  progress  of  the  race,  as  it  is  depicted 
in  the  same  book,  is  in  harmony  with  the  Darwin- 
ian theory.  Its  efficient  cause  is  what  may  be 
called  divine  selection,  which,  to  a  people  who 
knew  no  distinction  between  the  works  of  God  and 
those  of  nature,  was  but  another  name  for  natural 
selection.  Seth,  Noah,  Abraham,  Isaac,  and 
Jacob  are  successively  separated  from  other  mem- 


38    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

bers  of  their  families  or  from  their  fellow-men  on 
the  ground,  apparently,  of  certain  advantageous 
or  desirable  quahties  which  fitted  them  to  become, 
each  in  turn,  the  founders  of  a  higher  race.  And 
the  later  books  abundantly  recognize  the  same 
principle.  The  deportation  of  the  Jews  to  Baby- 
lon was  a  veritable  cataclysm,  which  extinguished 
politically  and  nationally  all  save  those  who  re- 
tained seventy  years  afterwards  so  much  of  loyalty 
to  their  ancestral  religion  as  made  them  equal  to 
the  sacrifice  and  self-denial  which  were  needed  for 
its  reinstatement  at  Jerusalem.  The  final  disap- 
pearance of  idolatry  from  among  this  people,  which 
was  coincident  with  this  event,  is  as  pronounced  an 
example  of  the  elimination  of  the  unfit  by  natural 
selection  as  can  be  found  in  history. 

And  there  is  evidently  no  necessary  antagonism 
between  this  theory  and  the  gospel,  which  likens 
the  kingdom  of  heaven  to  the  smallest  of  the  seeds, 
out  of  which  is  to  grow  the  great  tree  which  will 
shelter  the  birds  of  the  air  in  its  branches. 

That  the  theory  can  work  no  harm  to  the  church 
seems  thus  to  be  very  clear  ;  but  is  this  negative 
commendation  the  best  that  can  be  accorded  to  it  ? 
It  would  be  strange  indeed  if  this  interrogatory 
must  be  answered  affirmatively.  The  uniform 
effect  of  previous  discoveries  of  philosophical  or 
scientific  truth  has  been  to  shed  light  on  the  teach- 
ings of  the  Bible  and  so  to  increase  the  credibility 
of  the  Christian  revelation  ;  and  we  are,  therefore, 
the  better  prepared  to  believe  that  the  theory  of 


EVOLUTION  AND  THEISM  39 

evolution  can  be  made  to  yield  material  support  to 
the  cause  o£  theism  and  to  Christian  apologetics 
in  general. 

Perhaps  the  most  formidable  obstacle  which  the 
teacher  of  evolution  has  to  encounter,  if  we  omit 
the  unwillingness  of  most  men  to  acknowledge  re- 
lationship with  the  monkeys,  is  what  seems,  at  first 
glance,  the  obtrusive  incredibility  of  his  theory. 
It  demands  assent  to  propositions  which  the  human 
mind,  at  the  outset,  cannot  but  regard  as  mon- 
strously improbable.  It  would  have  us  believe 
that  a  microscopic  speck  of  vitalized  matter,  origi- 
nating we  know  not  how,  but,  as  is  assumed  by 
some,  from  the  action  of  forces  which  render  it  a 
product  of  mere  inert  matter,  devoid  of  organism 
and  mental  functions,  as  insignificant,  to  all  out- 
ward appearance,  as  a  grain  of  dust,  may  neverthe- 
less contain  potentially  highly  differentiated  living 
forms  without  number,  vast  intelligences  which  are 
to  solve  the  profoundest  mysteries  of  nature,  the 
germs  of  future  sciences,  philosophies,  and  inven- 
tions. 

The  tragedies  of  a  Shakespeare,  the  campaigns  of 
a  Napoleon,  the  statesmanship  of  a  Bismarck,  the 
symphonies  of  a  Beethoven,  the  pictures  of  a  Ra- 
phael, the  philanthropy  of  a  Clara  Barton,  are  all 
supposed  to  have  had  a  rudimentary  existence  in 
some  living  but  helpless  atom,  and  to  have  needed 
for  their  production  only  time  and  the  persistent 
action  of  unintelligent  forces.  I  well  remember 
laying  down,  many  years  ago,  a  copy  of  Spencer's 


40    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

"  Biology "  in  order  to  run  to  a  fire ;  and  I  am 
not  likely  ever  to  forget  the  mental  shock  I  expe- 
rienced when  the  ideas  which  I  had  imbibed  from 
that  work  came  into  sudden  collision  with  the 
manifestations  of  practical  and  energetic  life  in  the 
midst  of  which  I  soon  found  myself.  As  I  passed 
a  fire-engine  which  was  noisily  belching  out  smoke 
and  sparks,  while  it  flung,  with  impressive  power, 
tons  of  water  into  the  upper  stories  of  a  burning 
factory,  I  tried  to  persuade  myself  that  the  ma- 
chine existed  in  some  rudimentary  phase  ages  ago 
in  some  almost  invisible  dot  of  bioplasm  ;  and  if 
I  did  not  exclaim,  "  Credat  Judaeus  !  "  it  was 
because  I  did  not  express  in  words  the  emotions  I 
felt  at  the  moment.  The  leap,  when  thus  baldly 
exhibited,  is  too  long  for  the  human  reason  to 
take,  and  the  successive  steps  by  which  it  is  sought 
to  narrow  the  logical  chasm  are  so  numerous,  they 
are  so  largely  devoid  of  real  proof,  and  so  many  of 
them  are  missing,  that  it  is  safe  to  say  that  without 
some  cogent  facts  of  sufficient  force  to  remove  this 
obstacle,  Darwin's  theory  would  have  found  it  hard 
to  sustain  itself  very  far  above  the  level  of  a  phi- 
losophical curiosity. 

But  the  evolutionist  is  not  insensible  to  the 
difficulty  described,  and  believes  that  he  has  sur- 
mounted it.  So  far  is  it  from  being  incredible, 
in  his  estimation,  that  such  a  process  of  develop- 
ment as  has  just  been  outlined  should  have  taken 
place,  he  maintains  that  a  parallel  one  reaches  its 
climax  in  the  birth  of  every  human  being.     He 


EVOLUTION  AND  THEISM  41 

contends  that  the  transformation  of  a  minute,  em- 
bryonic cell,  during  the  space  of  a  few  months, 
into  a  living  babe  which  has  within  itself  latent 
capacities  that  a  few  years  will  ripen  into  intellec- 
tual faculties  of  perhaps  the  highest  order,  would 
be  antecedently  as  improbable  as  his  theory  of 
the  descent  of  man.  He  claims,  moreover,  that 
the  history  of  every  organism  before  it  begins  an 
independent  existence  summarizes  the  previous 
history  of  the  species  to  which  it  belongs.  "  This 
fundamental  law,  to  which  we  shall  recur  again, 
and  on  the  recognition  of  which  depends  the 
thorough  understanding  of  the  history  of  evolution, 
is  briefly  expressed  in  the  proposition  that  the  his- 
tory of  the  germ  is  an  epitome  of  the  history  of 
the  descent,  or,  in  other  words,  that  ontogeny  is 
a  recapitulation  of  phylogeny,  or,  somewhat  more 
explicitly,  that  the  series  of  forms  through  which 
the  individual  organism  passes  during  its  progress 
from  the  egg-cell  to  the  fully  developed  state  is 
the  brief,  compressed  reproduction  of  the  long 
series  of  forms  through  which  the  animal  ances- 
tors of  that  organism  (or  the  ancestral  forms  of 
its  species)  have  passed  from  the  earliest  periods 
of  so-called  organic  creation  down  to  the  present 
time"  (Haeckel).i 

The  evolutionist  sees   no   explanation   of    the 
seemingly  aimless  divergences  of  the  embryo  from 
what  would  appear  to  be  a  normal  course  of  devel- 
opment save  in  the  hypothesis  that  it  is  pursuing 
1  Evolution  of  Man,  i.  6.     (C.  Kegan  Paul  &  Co.,  1879.) 


42    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

the  zigzag  trail  along  which  the  parent  organism 
has  been  evolved  by  age-long  processes.  That 
embryonic  spiders  should  develop  legs  which  dis- 
appear before  birth,  that  foetal  whales  are  pro- 
vided with  teeth  which  are  wanting  in  the  adult 
animal,  that  embryonic  reptiles,  birds,  and  mam- 
mals should  have  gills  resembling  those  of  fishes 
and  that  the  gill  arches  should  afterwards  close  up, 
that  the  human  foetus  should  have  a  tail  supported 
by  eight  bones,  five  of  which  cease  to  exist  before 
it  is  born,  besides  numberless  other  cases  in  which 
wholly  useless  organs  appear  before  birth  only  to 
be  withdrawn  before  the  independent  hfe  begins  in 
which,  if  at  any  time,  they  might  prove  of  utility, 
he  believes  to  be  inexplicable  except  on  the  theory 
which  has  just  been  named.  He  deems  it  irrele- 
vant to  urge  sentimental  objections  to  the  theory 
that  the  human  race  has  sprung  from  lower  animal 
types  or  even  rational  objections  which  are  gi'ounded 
in  the  alleged  improbability  of  such  a  process,  when 
the  fact  is  incontestable  that  every  new-born  child 
has  just  completed  a  rapid  ascent  from  the  lowest 
to  the  highest  form  of  organic  being. 

This  argument  from  embryology  is  essential  to 
the  theory  of  evolution.  It  cannot  be  spared. 
According  to  Komanes,i  "  The  science  of  embry- 
ology affords  perhaps  the  strongest  of  aU  the 
strong  arguments  in  favor  of  evolution."  "  The 
leading  facts  in  embryology,  which  are  second  to 

1  Scientific  Evidences  of  Organic  Evolution,  pp.  63,  64.     (Mac- 
mUlan  &  Co.,  1882.) 


EVOLUTION  AND  THEISM  43 

none  in  importance,"  says  Darwin.i  "  Ontogeny," 
writes  Haeckel,^  "  is  of  the  most  inestimable 
value  for  the  knowledge  of  the  earliest  palaeonto- 
logical  conditions  of  development,  just  because  no 
petrified  remains  of  the  most  ancient  conditions  of 
the  development  of  tribes  and  classes  have  been 
preserved.  These,  indeed,  could  not  have  been 
preserved,  on  account  of  the  soft  and  tender  nature 
of  their  bodies.  No  petrifactions  could  inform  us 
of  the  fundamental  and  important  fact  which 
ontogeny  reveals  to  us,  that  the  more  ancient 
common  ancestors  of  all  the  different  animal  and 
vegetable  species  were  quite  simple  ceUs  like  the 
egg-cell.  No  petrifaction  could  prove  to  us  the 
immensely  important  fact  established  by  ontogeny 
that  the  simple  increase,  the  formation  of  cell 
aggregates,  and  the  differentiation  of  these  cells, 
produced  the  infinitely  manifold  forms  of  multi- 
cellular organisms.  Thus  ontogeny  helps  us  over 
many  and  large  gaps  in  palaeontology."  In  view 
of  these  high  estimates  of  its  evidential  value, 
which  are  of  the  nature  of  expert  testimony  on  the 
subject,  it  is  clear  that  the  facts  of  embryology 
cannot  be  dispensed  with  by  those  who  seek  to 
prove  the  theory  of  evolution. 

It  may  be  admitted  that  the  discovery  of  this 
analogy  or,  rather,  this  parallel  case,  neutralizes,  if 
it  is  fairly  used,  the  alleged  incredibility  of  the  evo- 
lutionary process  ;  but  as  it  is  commonly  employed, 

1  Origin  of  Species,  p.  396.     (Murray,  1872.) 

2  History  of  Creation,  ii.  3.     (D.  Appleton  &  Co.,  1876.) 


44    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

it  is  not  logically  competent  to  produce  that  result. 
It  has  no  value  as  an  argument  unless  it  is  allowed 
to  import  into  the  discussion  an  inference  of  the 
first  magnitude  which  is  inseparable  from  it. 

For  it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  every  germ 
which  has  the  power  to  develop  into  a  living  organ- 
ism possesses  it  through  a  vital  and  indispensable 
connection  with  an  individual  representing  as  high 
a  type  of  life  as  that  which  the  germ  itself  ulti- 
mately attains.  The  foetus  of  the  mammal  has 
been  maturing  for  months  within  the  body  of  its 
mother.  The  egg  of  a  fowl  has  had  a  similar  his- 
tory, and  has,  in  consequence,  reached  such  a  stage 
of  cellular  development  that  it  may  be  hatched, 
even  by  artificial  heat,  into  a  miniature  of  the 
parent  bird.  The  seed  of  a  plant  has  become  capa- 
ble of  producing  other  plants  of  a  certain  kind 
because  its  whole  structure  has  been  derived  from 
a  particular  plant  of  that  kind  in  which  it  grew. 
The  history  of  every  ripening  germ  and  maturing 
embryo  is  that  of  a  progressive  approach  on  the 
part  of  a  rudimentary  type  of  life  to  a  higher  tjrpe 
by  which  it  is  somehow  being  shaped,  and  which 
it  will  ultimately  resemble.  Enshrined  in  every 
parent  organism  there  is  something  which  the 
embryologist  can  neither  describe  nor  understand, 
and  which,  for  lack  of  a  better  name,  may  be 
called  an  archetypal  idea,  or  a  set  of  correlated 
vital  forces,  or  a  collocation  of  incomprehensible 
gemmules.  This  communicates  itself  to  an  almost 
invisible  germ,  which  it  develops  through  various 


EVOLUTION  AND  THEISM  45 

eccentric  meanderlngs  of  growth  into  a  likeness  to 
the  parent  animal  or  plant.  At  the  outset  there 
may  be  no  similarity  whatever  in  structure  or  in 
faculty  between  the  embryo  and  the  containing 
organism.  The  formative  influence  may  seem,  in 
some  cases,  to  have  lost  control  of  the  wayward 
offspring.  A  coralline  attached  to  a  rock  pro- 
duces a  host  of  huge  floating  jelly-fish ;  these  emit 
eggs  which  hatch  into  swimming  organisms ;  these 
fall  to  the  bottom,  where  they  fasten  themselves, 
and  develop  at  last  into  corallines.  Through  all 
these  protean  changes  the  mysterious  shaping  prin- 
ciple retains  its  hold  upon  its  material  and  brings 
it  in  the  end  with  infallible  precision  to  its  goal. 
If  the  various  organs  and  parts  are  transmitted  in 
the  form  of  atomic  gemmules,  these  cannot  be  so 
related  to  one  another  as  to  constitute  any  likeness 
whatever  to  the  adult  organism  into  which  they 
are  to  grow.  They  will  proceed  to  form  one  of 
an  altogether  different  type,  which  in  turn  will  be 
exchanged  for  another  of  a  wholly  diverse  char- 
acter. Like  the  magician  in  the  Arabian  tale,  the 
foetus  will  take  on,  in  rapid  succession,  forms  the 
most  unlike.  In  the  higher  orders  of  the  animal 
kingdom  it  will  become  in  turn  a  fish,  an  amphib- 
ian, a  lower  and  then  a  higher  mammal.  But  all 
the  while  there  is  a  definite  form  which  is  not  lost 
sight  of,  and  towards  which  the  maturing  organ- 
ism is  being  unerringly  led.  No  "  purely  mystical 
qualities  of  germ  plasm  "  can  be  more  mystical  or 
less  explicable  than  the  property  resident  in  the 


46    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

primitive  ovum  by  which  such  vast  changes  can 
be  wrought  without  defeating  the  expected  result. 
There  is  not  so  much  resemblance  between  the 
recondite  agencies  which  transform  the  incipient 
into  the  mature  animal  as  there  is  between  the 
apron  of  a  loom  and  the  figure  in  the  stuff  woven 
by  it. 

Now,  it  is  obviously  beside  the  mark  to  argue 
that  because  a  low  organic  type  may  be  evolved 
under  such  circumstances  into  the  very  highest,  a 
similar  process  has  taken  place  on  an  infinitely 
larger  scale  where  such  circumstances  did  not 
exist.  There  is  no  parity  of  reasoning  in  contend- 
ing that  because  a  vital  germ  has  developed  by 
virtue  of  its  derivation  from  and  its  union  with 
a  relatively  high  organic  and  intellectual  being 
into  an  infant  Paul  or  Shakespeare,  therefore  it  is 
rational  to  believe  that  a  sack  of  bioplasm  wholly 
unconnected  with  any  higher  type  of  life,  owing 
no  part  of  its  growth  to  any  preexistent  organism, 
receiving  shape  and  mental  traits  from  no  being 
of  a  higher  order,  has  been  evolved  into  the  race 
to  which  Shakespeare  and  Paul  belonged.  There 
is  no  close  analogy  between  what  I  may  call  de- 
pendent and  independent  evolution,  between  the 
development  of  a  life  through  force  exerted  by 
another  life  and  the  development  of  a  germ  into  a 
race  apart  from  any  such  connection. 

If,  as  Haeckel  ^  says,  ontogeny,  i.  e.,  foetal  de- 
velopment, "  is  a  short  and  quick  repetition  or 
1  History  of  Creation,  ii.  53. 


EVOLUTION  AND   THEISM  47 

recapitulation  of  phylogeny,"  i.  e.,  development 
of  the  species,  why  not  admit  that  there  must  be 
in  the  phylogenetic  process  something  that  corre- 
sponds to  that  influence  of  the  parent  organism 
which  is  indispensable  to  ontogenetic  growth  ?  If 
it  is  true,  as  the  same  high  authority  contends,^ 
that  "  as  every  animal  and  every  plant,  from  the 
beginning  of  its  individual  existence,  passes  through 
a  series  of  different  forms,  it  indicates  in  rapid  suc- 
cession and  in  general  outHnes  the  long  and  slowly 
changing  states  of  form  which  its  progenitors  have 
passed  through  from  the  most  ancient  times,"  why 
does  not  the  fact  that  the  individual  made  all  its 
progress  by  virtue  of  its  connection  with  a  preexist- 
ent  life  —  which  was,  until  almost  the  end,  of  an 
immeasurably  higher  type  than  its  own  —  necessi- 
tate the  inference  and  even  demonstrate  the  conclu- 
sion that  the  development  of  the  human  race  as  a 
whole  is  also  due  to  the  constant  presence  and  effi- 
cient agency  of  a  higher  Being  into  whose  likeness 
the  race  is  being  slowly  but  surely  fashioned  ? 
Ought  we  to  believe  that  a  granule  of  bioplasm 
has  not  only  come  into  existence  through  the  opera- 
tion of  forces  which  belong  to  inanimate  matter 
and  therefore  to  a  lower  order  of  being  than  its 
own,  but  also,  as  an  effect  of  forces  of  a  similar 
character,  has  obtained  the  power  to  propagate  it- 
self and  transmit  to  its  offspring  whatever  struc- 
tural gains  it  has  made  as  a  result  of  its  contact 
with  inert  matter,  to  inaugurate,  in  this  manner, 

1  History  of  Creation,  p.  33. 


48    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

a  succession  of  reproductive  forms  which  have  in- 
herited a  similar  power  of  transmission,  and  to 
eventuate  in  a  race  endowed  with  physical,  moral, 
intellectual,  and  spiritual  qualities  of  a  relatively 
infinite  largeness,  —  ought  we  to  believe  this  when 
what  is  held  to  be  perhaps  the  strongest  evidence 
of  the  theory  is  an  induction  marred  by  not  a  single 
exception  which  proves,  if  the  so-called  "  method  of 
Agreement "  can  prove  anything,  that  no  life  is  ever 
produced  except  through  the  agency  of  another  life 
of  at  first  a  higher  order  than  its  own,  —  ought  we 
to  believe  it  unless  we  also  accept  the  most  obvious 
corollary  which  that  induction  suggests,  namely, 
that  the  parallelism  between  the  lower  and  the 
higher  process  is  complete,  and  that  the  human  race 
itself  is  the  climax  of  a  development  which  is  due 
to  the  presence  and  active  influence  of  a  Being  of 
a  higher  order  than  itself  ? 

It  is  not  "  logical,"  says  Dawson,  "  to  allege  the 
evolution  taking  place  under  special  conditions  of 
parental  origin,  incubation,  etc.,  to  prove  the  possi- 
bility of  evolution  in  regard  to  which  all  these  pre- 
paratory conditions  and  efficient  causes  are  ab- 
sent." But  the  allegation  may  be  made  logical  by 
completing  the  analogy.  The  ontogenetic  parallel 
may  be  saved  by  a  self-consistent  interpretation 
of  the  phylogenetic  process.  What  is  needed  is 
not  the  excision  of  a  worthless  argument,  but  the 
recognition  of  a  conclusion  to  which  the  argument 
distinctly  points. 

It  would  seem,  then,  from  what  has  been  ad- 


EVOLUTION  AND  THEISM  49 

duced,  that  the  evolutionist  must  either  relinquish 
this  analogy,  and  so  leave  his  theory  without  its 
most  important  buttress,  or  else  assume  a  closer 
resemblance  between  the  growth  of  an  embryo  and 
the  evolution  of  a  species  than  he  is  as  yet,  as  a 
rule,  forward  to  admit.  It  wiU  be  necessary  for 
him  to  get  along  without  the  supposed  parallel  case 
of  embryonic  development,  or  to  acknowledge  that 
evolution  is  carried  on  through  forces  imparted  by 
a  Being  higher  than  the  highest  race^h^t  is  being 
evolved.  In  the  one  case,  his  theory  loses  much 
of  its  credibility  through  the  loss  of  its  strongest 
support ;  in  the  other,  it  becomes  the  handmaid 
of  theism.  If  he  claims  to  have  the  right  to  read 
in  the  successive  changes  that  take  place  in  the 
human  embryo  the  history  of  the  descent  of  man, 
he  must  be  self-consistent  in  his  use  of  his  illustra- 
tion. He  must  not  mutilate  it.  He  must  not  cut 
it  in  halves.  If  it  has  any  important  bearing  on 
his  subject,  if  it  proves  or  tends  to  prove  anything 
whatever,  the  argument  involved  in  it  is  this  :  the 
successive  stages  of  the  development  of  an  indi- 
vidual before  birth  epitomize  those  which  have 
occurred  in  the  evolution  of  the  species,  and  as  the 
former  took  place  and  were  made  possible  by  the 
influence  of  a  higher  form  of  life,  so  the  latter 
presuppose  the  existence  and  creative  activity  of  a 
higher  than  the  highest  species  which  is  being  pro- 
duced. 

In  a  word,  he  must  complete  his  analogy  or  give 
it  up.     He  must  believe,  if  he  retains  it,  that  back 


50    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

of  the  long  process  of  evolution,  back  of  the  laws 
which  govern  it,  there  is  something,  though  on  a 
scale  inconceivably  vast,  which  corresponds  to  the 
archetypal  life  that  resides  unseen  in  every  organ- 
ism and  that  gradually  shapes  into  likeness  to  itself 
embryonic  forms  which,  at  first,  have  no  resemblance 
to  it.  He  must  believe  that  the  various  organisms 
lower  than  man  are  not  the  product  of  blind  and 
random  forces,  but  are  the  result  of  prior  ideals 
or  models,  which  are  using  the  forces  of  nature  in 
order  to  clothe  themselves  in  visible  forms,  and 
which  may,  perhaps,  find  some  explanation  in  what 
Tennyson  called  the  "  imagination  of  God."  He  is 
constrained,  in  fine,  if  he  would  not  sacrifice  an 
indispensable  analogy,  to  concede  that  the  mater- 
nal side  of  embryonic  development  has  its  coun- 
terpart also  in  the  evolutionary  process,  and  that 
there  is  a  Being,  higher  than  man,  through  whose 
influence  the  crowning  type  of  terrestrial  fife  is 
being  elevated  into  an  ever-increasing  resemblance 
to  a  rational  and  moral  archetype. 

The  foregoing  considerations  are  well  calculated 
to  remove  aU  atheistic  implications  from  the  doc- 
trine of  evolution.  So  far  is  it  from  antagonizing  an 
intelligent  belief  in  a  Supreme  Being,  it  actually 
furnishes  a  new  proof  of  his  existence.  The  phy- 
logenetic  argument,  as  the  one  above  given  may 
be  called,  ranges  evolution  distinctly  on  the  side 
of  theism.  If  the  new  philosophy  begins  with  an 
attack  on  the  argument  from  design,  it  must  ap- 
parently end  by  recognizing,  in  conformity  to  its 


EVOLUTION  AND  THEISM  51 

analogies,  all  that  is  essential  in  that  argument. 
It  has  strengthened,  by  an  apparently  necessary 
deduction  from  a  generally  accepted  theory,  what 
had  already  been  regarded  by  some  as  a  precarious 
induction  from  possibly  misinterpreted  facts.  And 
this  deduction  it  is  under  bonds  to  defend,  because 
it  cannot  omit  to  do  so  without  destroying  the 
logical  pertinence  of  perhaps  its  strongest  proof. 


CHAPTER  III 

THE   ETHICAL   BACKGEOUND   OF   NATURE 

The  materialistic  philosophy  does  not  necessa- 
rily deny  that  there  is  a  First  Cause  of  all  natural 
phenomena.  Herbert  Spencer  does  not  teach  that 
the  sequence  of  cause  and  effect  is  a  chain  which 
hangs  by  no  highest  link.  The  evolutionist  who 
believes  that  certain  forces  have  been  and  are  pro- 
ducing, by  a  continuous  process,  all  the  results 
which  collectively  make  up  what  we  call  nature  is 
not  unwilling  to  admit  that  there  was  an  initial 
impetus,  a  starting-point,  an  original  cause  from 
which  all  subsequent  causation  has  been  derived. 
But  there  are  those  who  contend  that  nothing 
whatever  can  be  known  of  this  primordial  source 
of  phenomena  beyond  the  fact  of  its  existence. 
They  contend  that  to  make  it  a  subject  of  scien- 
tific or  philosophical  inquiry  is  idle,  that  the 
human  reason  is  not  competent  to  determine  its 
nature  or  attributes.  Mr.  Huxley,  no  doubt, 
would  have  found  a  place  for  all  speculations  on 
this  subject,  or  at  least  for  all  practical  rules  of 
conduct  derived  from  them,  in  his  famous  category 
of  "  lunar  politics." 

Mr.   Spencer  ^  states  that  there  are  but  three 

1  First  Principles,  p.  30.     (D.  Appleton  &  Co.,  1875.) 


THE  ETHICAL  BACKGROUND  OF  NATURE  53 

ways  of  accounting  for  the  present  system  of 
things,  namely,  that  the  universe  is  either  self- 
existent,  self-created,  or  created  by  an  external 
power ;  and  he  proceeds  to  show  that  all  of  these 
theories  are  untenable,  that  there  is  no  one  of 
them  which  does  not  involve  self-contradictions. 
He  concludes,  therefore,  that "  if  religion  and  science 
are  to  be  reconciled,  the  basis  of  reconciliation 
must  be  this  deepest,  widest,  and  most  certain  of 
all  facts,  that  the  power  which  the  universe  mani- 
fests to  us  is  utterly  inscrutable."  But,  as  Mr. 
Martineau  ^  has  pointed  out,  "  we  are  told  [by  Mr. 
Spencer]  in  one  breath  that  this  being  must  be 
in  every  sense  '  perfect,  complete,  total '  —  includ- 
ing in  itself  all  power  and  transcending  all  law  — 
and,  in  another,  that  this  perfect  and  omnipotent 
one  is  totally  incapable  of  revealing  any  one  of 
the  infinite  store  of  attributes."  Thus,  "  you  deny 
the  Absolute  in  the  very  act  of  affirming  it,  for  in 
debarring  the  First  Cause  from  self-revelation  you 
impose  a  limit  on  its  nature." 

Moreover,  the  very  fact  that  Mr.  Spencer  char- 
acterizes the  Absolute  as  the  First  Cause  involves 
a  contradiction.  Cause  is  a  relative  term.  It 
necessarily  implies  an  effect.  A  cause  which  pro- 
duces no  effect  is  unthinkable.  To  affirm  that  the 
Absolute  is  a  cause  is  to  suggest  that  intellectual 
paradox,  an  absolute  that  has  a  relation.  As  the 
existence  of  this  First  Cause  is  supposed  to  be 
necessary  in  order  to  account  for  the  power  that  is 

1  Essays,  pp.  190,  191.     (Wmiam  V.  Spencer,  1866.) 


54    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

manifested  in  the  world,  the  manifestations  of  that 
power  are  effects  of  the  so-called  Absolute.  We 
are  compelled  by  the  natural  workings  of  the 
human  reason  to  draw  certain  inferences  from 
these  effects,  certain  conclusions  regarding  the 
character  of  the  original  Cause.  To  tell  us  that 
this  is  absolute  and  unknowable  will  not  discour- 
age us  from  doing  so.  We  are  dealing  with  facts, 
not  with  words.  The  same  irresistible  laws  of 
mental  action  which  constrain  us  to  admit  that 
there  is  a  First  Cause  are  equally  potent  in  con- 
vincing us  that  we  can  know  something  about  it. 
If  Matthew  Arnold  is  right  in  affirming  that 
there  is  in  the  world  a  power  that  makes  for  right- 
eousness, it  is  logically  impossible  for  us  not  to 
believe  that  some  of  the  relations  of  that  power  to 
ethical  conduct  are  discoverable.  And  so  effects 
which  are  traceable  to  an  absolute  cause  oblige 
us  to  draw  conclusions  with  regard  to  its  charac- 
ter, even  if  we  are  assured  that  we  have  no  right 
to  hold  them.  It  is  recognized  that  a  priori  and 
a  posteriori  reasoning  are  not  of  equal  strength, 
and  that  when  their  respective  conclusions  are  in 
conflict,  it  is  the  former  that  must  give  way.  An 
intellectual  necessity  must  override  a  mere  philo- 
sophical conceit. 

It  is  hard  to  avoid  the  suspicion  that  men  who 
involve  themselves  in  such  hopeless  contradictions 
as  are  indicated  above  simply  show  by  so  doing 
that  they  have  exceeded  the  limits  of  philosophical 
inquiry,  —  that  they  have  waded  out  into  the  ocean 


THE  ETHICAL  BACKGROUND  OF  NATURE  55 

of  truth  beyond  their  depth.  It  is  much  easier 
to  beheve  that  the  human  mind  is  not  profound 
enough  to  grasp  transcendental  facts  than  it  is  to 
beheve  that  the  First  Cause  is  an  entity  which  can 
only  be  described  in  terms  which  flatl}^  contradict 
one  another.  It  must  be  that  whoever  holds  such 
a  belief  as  that  last  named  mistakes  mental  con- 
fusion for  logical  proof,  and  utter  bewilderment  for 
rational  conviction.  We  are  reminded  of  Mr. 
Mill's  remark  made  in  a  different  connection : 
"  The  doctrine  ...  is  so  contrary  to  common 
sense,  that  a  person  must  have  made  some  advances 
in  philosophy  to  believe  it."  ^ 

The  researches  of  the  practical  religionist  are 
not  to  be  barred  by  antinomies.  It  is  said  that  a 
spider's  web  at  the  entrance  of  a  cave  was  proof 
enough  to  the  pursuers  of  Mohammed  that  he 
was  not  within ;  but  no  fine-spun  theories  as  to 
the  utter  inscrutability  of  the  power  which  the  uni- 
verse manifests  can  prevent  him  who  is  seeking 
for  the  Being  whom  he  should  thank  for  the  bless- 
ings of  life  from  following  effects  up  to  their  pri- 
mordial cause  and  so  deducing  character  from 
conduct.  Alexanders  do  not  stop  to  untie  Gordian 
knots.  They  know  of  a  quicker  way  to  universal 
dominion.  The  logical  snarls  by  which  some  think- 
ers who  have  overthought  themselves  would  bind 
the  chariots  of  faith  cannot  be  permitted  to  delay 
the  progress  of  him  who  is  ambitious  to  find  the 
Author  of  his  being,  but  they  must  be  cleft  asunder 
by  the  sharp  sword  of  common  sense. 
1  Logic,  p.  188. 


56    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

It  is  very  manifest  that  if  the  extreme  agnostic 
position  of  Mr.  Spencer  can  be  maintained,  religion, 
in  any  very  important  sense  of  the  word,  is  an  im- 
possibility, if  not  an  absurdity.  The  basis  of  its 
reconciliation  with  science  as  described  by  him  is 
simply  a  radical  change  in  its  essential  character 
and  the  utter  disappearance  of  it  as  it  is  now  con- 
ceived. The  very  essence  of  every  religious  cult 
which  has  received  an  extensive  recognition  among 
men  is  the  belief  that  human  destiny  is  more  or 
less  dependent  on  some  being  or  beings  higher 
than  man,  and  of  whom  something  material  to 
human  interests  may  be  learned.  Even  Buddhism 
is  no  exception  to  the  rule,  for  though  ultimately 
atheistic,  it  "  recognized  gods  many  and  lords  many, 
products  of  the  cosmic  process  and  transitory,  how- 
ever long-enduring,  manifestations  of  its  eternal 
activity  "  (Huxley).  The  rites  and  observances 
of  every  religion  presuppose  a  belief  that  some- 
thing of  importance  in  reference  to  divine  myster- 
ies has  been  discovered  or  revealed.  If  it  is  true, 
therefore,  that  nothing  whatever  can  be  learned  as 
to  the  nature  or  character  of  the  being  or  ultimate 
fact  on  which  human  destiny  depends,  aU  worship 
becomes  futile  and  meaningless. 

But  that  it  is  not  true  can  be  established  to  the 
satisfaction  of  practical  men  in  more  than  one 
way.  If  there  is  a  real  parallelism  between  the 
development  of  an  embryo  and  that  of  a  species,  — 
if,  in  other  words,  the  theory  of  evolution  is  not  to 
be  deprived  of  its  strongest  argument,  and  conse- 


THE   ETHICAL  BACKGROUND   OF  NATURE    57 

quently  of  a  certain  portion  of  its  credibility,  —  the 
highest  type  of  terrestrial  life  must  be  maturing 
into  a  likeness  to  some  parent  organism  or  life,  for 
such  is  the  case  with  every  living  form  in  the  earlier 
stages  of  its  existence.  But  a  containing  organism 
would  seem  to  be  out  of  the  question  in  the  present 
instance.  We  are  driven,  therefore,  to  the  conclu- 
sion that  there  is  an  invisible  Being  whom  the  race 
is  coming  more  and  more  to  resemble,  that  at  the 
source  of  the  evolutionary  forces  there  is  some- 
thing which  we  may  call  a  parent  type,  which, 
like  the  un discoverable  model  in  the  embryo,  is 
fashioning  a  likeness  to  itself  out  of  ever-chang- 
ing unlikenesses. 

That  the  evolution  of  man  has  been  completed 
is  not  to  be  supposed.  In  his  case,  what  may  be 
not  inaptly  called  the  process  of  gestation  is  still 
going  on.  Organically  he  may  have  reached  his 
ultimate  form,  unless  it  is  to  be  expected  that 
some  survivals  of  outgrown  organs  will  yet  be 
eliminated.  The  characteristics  which  he  is  to 
acquire  in  the  future  are  not  physical,  but  men- 
tal and  moral.  "When  humanity  began  to  be 
evolved,"  says  Fiske,^  "  an  entirely  new  chapter 
in  the  history  of  evolution  was  opened.  Hence- 
forth, the  life  of  the  nascent  soul  came  to  be  first  in 
importance,  and  the  bodily  life  came  to  be  subordi- 
nated to  it.  Henceforth,  it  appeared  that  in  this 
direction,  at  least,  the  process  of  zoological  change 
had  come  to  an  end  and  a  process  of  psychological 

1  Destiny  of  Man,  p.  30. 


58    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

change  was  to  take  its  place.  Henceforth,  along 
this  supreme  line  of  generation  there  was  to  be  no 
further  evolution  of  new  species  through  physical 
variation,  but  through  the  accumulation  of  psy- 
chical variations  one  particular  species  was  to  be 
indefinitely  perfected  and  raised  to  a  totally  differ- 
ent plane  from  that  on  which  all  life  had  hitherto 
existed.  Henceforth,  in  short,  the  dominant 
aspect  of  evolution  was  to  be,  not  the  genesis  of 
species,  but  the  progress  of  civilization." 

It  is  by  following  out  the  line  of  these  psychical 
changes  and  determining  the  goal  towards  which 
they  are  tending  that  we  are  to  obtain  a  rational 
idea  of  that  invisible  First  Cause  by  which  they 
have  been  set  in  motion  and  sustained.  It  is  in 
its  final  characteristics  that  the  embryo  reproduces 
most  nearly  the  parental  organism ;  and  it  is  in  the 
traits  last  acquired  by  the  human  race,  therefore, 
that  we  should  seek  to  recognize  that  Being  into 
whose  likeness  the  analogies,  or  rather  the  inev- 
itable implications  of  evolution,  constrain  us  to 
believe  that  the  as  yet  but  embryonic  human  race 
is  being  shaped.  Not  in  transitory  organic  forms, 
but  in  moral  ideals  which  can  never  be  improved, 
in  spiritual  attainments  beyond  which  progress  is 
inconceivable,  in  an  ethical  development  which, 
though  as  yet  hardly  more  than  begun,  may  be 
regarded  as  foreshadowing  the  ultimate  fundamen- 
tal variation  of  humanity,  are  we  to  search  for 
what  evolution  can  disclose  to  us  of  the  character 
that  is  behind  all  cosmic  phenomena.     "  He  that 


THE  ETHICAL  BACKGROUND  OF  NATURE    59 

hatli  seen  me  hatli  seen  the  Father,"  i  is  peculiarly- 
true  in  the  mouth  of  ideal  righteousness. 

We  cannot,  then,  but  admit  that  this  Being 
must  be  a  mind,  inasmuch  as  mind,  however  we 
may  define  it,  is  one  of  the  attributes  of  the  high- 
est type  of  terrestrial  life,  and  that  it  must  be  a 
spirit,  since  that  is  the  name  we  give  to  mind  which 
is  not  associated  with  a  bodily  organism.  Nor  if 
we  beHeve  that  self-consciousness,  the  sense  of 
individuality,  is  a  higher  endowment  than  the 
absence  of  it  could  be,  are  we  at  liberty  to  doubt 
that  this  Being  who  is  working  through  the  whole 
system  of  evolutionary  forces  is  a  person  in  some 
true  sense  of  the  word. 

We  need  not  allow  ourselves  to  be  confused  at 
this  point  by  such  suggestions  as  that  there  may 
be  a  higher  attribute  of  existence  than  personality. 
They  are  like  the  gleams  of  sunlight  which  mis- 
chievous boys  flash  from  bits  of  looking-glass  into 
the  eyes  of  pedestrians,  bringing  them  to  a  stand- 
still, and  so  delaying  their  progress  until  the  cause 
of  the  annoyance  is  found.  We  have  no  more  to  do 
with  the  question  whether  there  is  something  higher 
than  personality  than  the  stevedore  has  to  do  with 
the  equally  practical  question  whether  there  may 
not  be  a  fourth  dimension  of  space.  We  ought 
not  to  stop  and  amuse  or  distract  ourselves  with  it. 
We  are  justified  in  believing  that  the  First  Cause 
is  at  least  a  Person,  and  with  that  belief  we  must  re- 
main satisfied  until  we  know  that  it  can  be  enlarged. 

^  John  xiv.  9. 


60    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

And  it  is  easy  for  us  to  obtain  a  rational  convic- 
tion as  to  the  moral  character  of  the  same  Being. 
The  history  of  the  ethical  progress  of  the  human 
race  is  that  of  a  gradual  elevation  of  its  ideas  of 
moral  conduct.  If  the  virtuous  man  was  at  first 
merely  one  who  was  specially  serviceable  to  his 
tribe,  the  advance  of  civilization  soon  rendered 
that  conception  of  virtue  antiquated  and  narrow. 
The  ethical  standards  of  each  generation  are  higher 
than  those  of  the  generation  which  immediately 
preceded  it.  Institutions  and  customs  to  which 
no  general  moral  discredit  attached  in  one  century 
are  recognized  as  wrongs  and  abuses  in  the  next. 
The  growth  of  public  sentiment  in  regard  to  human 
slavery,  penal  laws,  the  conduct  of  war,  and  many 
other  subjects  that  could  be  named,  illustrates  this 
fact.  The  ethical  development  of  the  race  is  still 
proceeding.  There  is  an  influence  at  work  on  the 
human  conscience  which  is  steadily  quickening  its 
appreciation  of  moral  values  and  bringing  the  con- 
duct of  mankind  ever  nearer  to  some  absolute 
ethical  ideal. 

Nor  can  we  doubt  as  to  what  this  is.  Altruism, 
unselfishness,  spiritual  love,  is  the  moral  goal 
which  is  looming  up  with  increasing  distinctness, 
thousrh  stiU  in  the  far  distance,  and  towards  which 
the  human  race  is  directing  its  steps.  SeK-sacri- 
fice,  living  for  others,  humanitarianism,  philan- 
thropy, —  these  are  expressions  which  are  recog- 
nized as  suggesting  the  highest  conceivable  types 
of  human  conduct.     The  Sermon  on  the  Mount  is 


THE  ETHICAL  BACKGROUND  OF  NATURE    61 

extensively  accepted  as  embodying  in  language  the 
ideal  moral  life.  Darwin  names  as  the  most  noble 
attribute  of  man,  ^'  disinterested  love  for  all  living 
creatures."  "  Real  goodness,"  says  Max  Miiller, 
"  is  always  in  some  form  unselfishness."  Spencer's 
ethics  may  be  defined  as  a  practical  altruism.  An 
absolute  altruism  is  taught  by  Bentham  and  James 
Mill.  The  philosophy  which  found  the  ground  of 
moral  obligation  in  individual  self-interest  has  been 
outgrown.  Whatever  may  have  been  the  origin  of 
the  "  categorical  imperative,"  whatever  may  have 
been  the  influences  which  developed  in  the  most 
enlightened  section  of  the  human  race  its  present 
ethical  ideal,  the  fact  is  undeniable  that  love,  or 
unselfish  benevolence,  has  come  to  be  very  widely 
viewed  as  inseparable  from  a  perfect  moral  char- 
acter. 

No  one  who  has  ever  experienced  the  supreme 
power  of  conscience,  whether  in  the  form  of  re- 
morse or  in  that  of  moral  approbation,  —  especially 
when  its  highest  praise  or  most  stinging  censure 
has  been  bestowed  on  moral  acts  which  only  finely 
developed  natures  would  regard  as  important  enough 
to  merit  a  second  thought,  on  purposes  which  have 
been  frustrated  before  they  were  able  to  ripen  into 
beneficent  or  injurious  deeds,  on  thoughts  which 
have  never  found  outward  expression,  which  have 
had  no  influence  save  on  the  soul  in  which  they 
sprang  up  and  whose  high  ideals  alone  rendered 
them  noticeable,  —  no  one  who  has  had  his  con- 
science manifest  its  power  in  these  ways  will  be 


62    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

able  to  persuade  himself  that  tliis  awful  faculty 
is  merely  a  survival  of  certain  ancient  tribal  or 
social  instincts.  Whatever  influence  these  may 
have  had  on  its  growth,  there  is  a  large  residue  of 
effect  which  remains  to  be  explained.  Wallace  ^ 
says,  "  Although  the  practice  of  benevolence, 
honesty,  or  truth  may  have  been  useful  to  the  tribe 
possessing  these  virtues,  that  does  not  at  all  account 
for  the  peculiar  sanctity  attached  to  actions  which 
each  tribe  considers  right  and  moral  as  contrasted 
with  the  different  feelings  with  which  they  regard 
what  is  merely  useful."  Speaking  of  truthfulness, 
which  is  so  seldom  enforced  by  law  and  which  so 
often  entails  loss  on  him  who  practices  it,  he  asks :  ^ 
"  How  can  we  believe  that  considerations  of  utihty 
could  ever  invest  it  with  the  mysterious  sanctity  of 
the  highest  virtue,  —  could  ever  induce  men  to 
value  truth  for  its  own  sake  or  practice  it  regard- 
less of  consequences  ?  " 

It  is  little  to  the  purpose  to  cite  the  innumera- 
ble instances  in  which  conscience  has  sanctioned 
acts  which  are  repugnant  to  a  more  highly  culti- 
vated moral  sense.  That  it  needs  the  cooperation  of 
an  educated  judgment  for  its  best  practical  effects 
is  doubtless  true.  To  quote  once  more  from  the 
author  last  named  :  ^  "If  a  moral  sense  is  an  es- 
sential part  of  our  nature,  it  is  easy  to  see  that  its 
sanction  may  often  be  given  to  acts  which  are  use- 
less or  immoral,  just  as  the  natural  appetite  for 

1  Contributions  to  the  Theory  of  Natural  Selection,  p.  352. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  353.  3  lud.,  p.  355. 


THE  ETHICAL  BACKGROUND  OF  NATURE    63 

drink  is  perverted  by  tlie  drunkard  into  the  means 
for  his  destruction."  Its  peculiar  function  is  to 
inculcate  a  particular  spirit,  to  impart  a  motive  of 
the  highest  moral  order,  and  it  is  the  province  of 
the  reason  to  designate  the  different  acts  in  wliich 
this  spirit  and  this  motive  shall  express  themselves. 
A  spring  of  water,  when  it  first  breaks  through  the 
ground,  may  be  turbid  enough.  It  may  be  laden 
with  impurities  which  it  has  washed  out  of  the  soil 
through  which  it  has  forced  its  way.  But  the 
time  is  likely  to  come  when  it  will  have  been  freed 
from  these  and  will  bubble  up  as  clear  and  limpid 
as  the  underground  pools  from  which  it  comes. 
And  so  the  "  categorical  imperative  "  is  forced  to 
make  its  way  through  endless  strata  of  human  ig- 
norance and  selfishness,  from  which  are  imported 
into  its  practical  operations  much  that  is  absurd, 
much  even  that  is  immoral,  much  perhaps  that  is 
cruel  and  abhorrent ;  but  it  has  the  power  to  cleanse 
itself  from  these  accretions.  Its  single  compre- 
hensive dictum,  "  Live  the  best  life  you  know," 
assures  to  it  an  ever-increasing  purity  of  current, 
which  is  not  likely  to  be  permanently  fouled  again 
by  any  sediment  absorbed  from  the  lower  stages  of 
moral  development  that  it  leaves  behind.  It  will 
take  on  ever  more  and  more  the  appearance  of  a 
special  channel  of  communication  by  which  the 
parent  character  is  infusing  itself  into  the  slowly 
developing  human  soul. 

But  even  if  the  moral  sentiment  has  been  gener- 
ated solely  through  the  operation  of  namable  evo- 


64  THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

lutionary  forces,  these  must  be  referred  to  the 
parent  Bemg  in  connection  with  whom  the  race  is 
being  evolved.  They  are  still  analogous  to  those 
concerned  in  the  process  of  gestation,  and  which 
shape  individual  germs  into  a  likeness  to  the  parent 
organism.  We  must  still  recognize  in  the  result  the 
character  of  the  supreme  parent.  If  we  are  justi- 
fied in  regarding  evolution  as  a  method  by  which 
a  superior  mind  is  developing  a  race  into  a  resem- 
blance to  itself,  we  cannot  escape  the  conclusion 
that  the  prime  moral  characteristic  of  that  mind 
is  disinterested  love. 

Life  takes  on  a  new  meaning  when  considered 
from  this  point  of  view.  It  may  be  compared  to  a 
fomitain  through  whose  complicated  jets  the  water 
is  forced  into  various  and  even  fantastic  shapes  \ 
but  whether  this  spreads  itself  in  every  direction 
near  the  surface  of  the  surrounding  pond  or  rushes 
aloft  in  a  majestic  column  whose  white  summit 
towers  above  the  trees,  it  is  always  bearing  wit- 
ness to  the  existence  of  a  reservoir  which  is  higher 
than  the  greatest  height  which  the  liquid  column 
attains.  Terrestrial  life  may  have  been  divided 
into  its  countless  forms  by  the  diversities  in  the 
channels  through  which  it  has  been  evolved ;  but 
if  so,  then  the  loftiest  growth  of  mind  and  morals 
wliich  it  exhibits  is  but  the  result  of  a  spiritual  law 
which  is  bringing  it  nearer  the  level  of  the  sublime 
Life  from  which  it  derives  its  power  of  ascent. 

The  argument  might  be  safely  left  at  this  point, 
and  whatever  objections  might  be  urged  against  the 


THE  ETHICAL  BACKGROUND  OF  NATURE    65 

conclusions  reached  regarding  the  moral  character 
which  is  behind  the  forces  of  nature  could  be  legit- 
imately classed  as  residuary  phenomena.  The  evo- 
lutionist is  obliged  to  admit  that  there  are  difficul- 
ties in  the  way  of  his  theory.  Darwin  ^  recognized 
their  existence,  and  alludes  to  them  in  the  remark : 
"  Any  one  whose  disposition  leads  him  to  attach 
more  weight  to  unexplained  difficulties  than  to  the 
explanation  of  a  certain  number  of  facts,  will  cer- 
tainly reject  my  theory."  I  have  an  impression  that 
even  Newton  failed  at  first  to  account  for  some 
troublesome  facts  by  his  law  of  gravitation.  But 
men  permit  a  strong  induction  to  override  some 
objections,  and  assume  that  they  will  be  answered 
later  on.  It  certainly  would  not  be  irrational  to 
follow  the  same  course  in  the  line  of  reasoning 
which  has  been  thus  far  pursued.  If  there  appear 
to  be  facts  in  nature  which  can  be  quoted  against 
the  inference  that  there  is  a  benevolent  power 
above  nature,  it  would  not  be  impertinent  to  argue 
that  the  inference  is  so  abundantly  justified  by 
other  considerations  that  these  facts  may  be  prop- 
erly set  aside,  as  suggesting  difficulties  which  are 
due  wholly  to  the  natural  limitations  of  the  human 
understanding. 

But  the  objections  referred  to  have  reaUy  very 
much  less  weight  than  is  commonly  ascribed  to 
them.  There  are  but  two  that  have  any  impor- 
tance, and  of  these  the  more  serious  is  the  existence 
of  moral  evil  in  the  world. 

^  Origin  of  Species, 


66    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

But  this  phenomenon  creates  comparatively  lit- 
tle difficulty  in  the  mind  of  a  theist  who  has  ac- 
cepted the  evolutionary  philosophy.  From  his 
point  of  view,  evil  did  not  come  into  the  world  as 
evil.  It  was  originally  even  good,  in  the  sense 
that  it  was  necessary  for  the  preservation  of  animal 
life.  It  was  action  devoid  of  immoral  quality,  be- 
cause suited  to  the  nature  of  lower  organic  types. 
It  became  evil  in  man  only  because  he  could  con- 
ceive a  higher  standard  of  conduct.  Moral  evil 
began  as  the  result  of  a  battle  between  confirmed 
non-moral  habits  and  a  rudimentary  conscience,  in 
which  the  latter  sustained  defeat.  It  originated 
in  the  perception  of  a  higher  moral  ideal  than 
man  had  hitherto  known  or  was  as  yet  willing  to 
emulate.  It  is  a  survival  of  a  more  primitive 
grade  of  conduct,  and  is  therefore  coordinate  with 
the  alleged  imperfections  in  the  human  organism. 
Both  have  become  objectionable  because  they  are 
out  of  date,  because  they  are  the  relics  of  some- 
thing which  was  once  useful,  but  is  so  no  longer. 
A  man  is  wicked  primarily  because  he  continues 
to  act  as  an  animal  after  he  has  reached  a  stage  of 
moral  illumination  which  enables  him  to  appre- 
ciate, to  some  extent,  the  relative  lowness  of  ani- 
mal conduct. 

"We  may  say,  in  a  certain  loose,  popular  way, 
that  shadows  in  the  daytime  are  caused  by  the  sun, 
but,  strictly  speaking,  they  are  merely  the  partial 
survivals  of  a  previous  darkness.  The  surface 
around  them  is  illumined  by  a  light  which  does  not 


THE  ETHICAL  BACKGROUND   OF  NATURE    67 

fully  reacli  the  surface  on  which  they  rest.  The 
result  is  a  contrast  of  which  the  eye  takes  note. 
Certain  areas  have  not  kept  pace  with  the  advance 
of  day.  They  were  as  bright  as  any  others  until 
the  sun  rose ;  and  they  are  now  dark,  not  because 
the  sun  creates  darloiess,  but  because  they  have 
been  left  behind  in  the  growing  illumination.  If 
the  obstructions  are  icicles,  the  sun  perhaps  will 
melt  them  and  the  shadows  will  vanish. 

And  so,  from  the  point  of  view  of  the  evolution- 
ist, sin  was  not  originally  sin,  —  or,  more  accu- 
rately, acts  which  are  now  classed  as  sinful  were 
not,  at  the  outset,  morally  reprehensible.  They  are 
survivals  of  lines  of  conduct  which  were  once  per- 
fectly natural  and  wholly  devoid  of  ethical  signifi- 
cance. They  are  shadows  which  rest  on  the  soul 
simply  because  a  higher  conception  of  conduct  has 
dawned  which  has  not  as  yet  brought  into  harmony 
with  itself  the  whole  character  of  the  man.  It  has 
not  melted  the  ruling  motives  of  an  earlier  and 
lower  state  of  existence.  Part  of  his  nature  lags 
behind  his  growing  sense  of  moral  obhgation,  and 
so  creates  the  contrast  which  we  call  sin.  As  John 
Fiske  ^  expresses  it :  "  Moral  evil  is  simply  the  char- 
acteristic of  the  lower  state  of  living  as  looked  at 
from  the  higher." 

I  think  it  was  Wallace  who  found  the  Biblical 
tradition  of  the  f aU  of  man  in  close  accord  with 
the  principles  of  evolution,  and  suggested  that  the 
Serpent  might  be  regarded  as  a  symbol  of  man's 

1  Through  Nature  to  God,  p.  54. 


68    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

animal  nature  gaining  a  victory  over  the  feeble 
and  newly  awakened  moral  nature.  Every  person 
has  his  fall  in  the  same  sense.  There  is  doubtless 
a  certain  period  during  which  the  conduct  of  an 
infant  is  devoid  of  any  ethical  quality,  because  the 
power  to  know  right  from  wrong  has  not  yet  been 
evolved.  The  motives  and  acts  of  the  child  are 
prompted  by  purely  sensuous  impulses.  It  neither 
has,  nor  can  as  yet  understand,  any  reason  for 
doing  anything  whatever  save  for  the  satisfaction 
of  a  personal  want.  But  sooner  or  later  a  sense 
of  moral  obligation  comes  to  it  which  traverses  its 
natural  inchnations.  A  feehng  of  duty,  of  ought- 
ness,  which  can  only  be  gratified  at  the  cost  of 
self-denial,  finds  its  way  into  consciousness.  Op- 
posing itseK  to  a  customary  course  of  action  which 
is  of  the  nature  of  an  incipient  habit,  it  is  over- 
ridden. It  fails  to  control  the  conduct,  and  the 
result  is  a  sin,  followed  by  the  first  glimmerings  of 
the  knowledge  of  good  and  evil.  A  human  being 
has  fallen,  in  the  theological  sense  of  the  word. 

It  is  an  experience  which  is  repeated  in  the  life 
of  every  one.  Adam  is  man,  not  only  in  the 
Hebrew  lexicon,  but  also  in  the  moral  history  of 
each  individual.  The  third  chapter  of  Genesis  is 
more  than  a  myth.  It  is  true,  even  if  it  is  not 
to  be  regarded  as  historical.  It  records  an  event 
which,  according  to  the  new  philosophy,  must  have 
happened,  even  though  the  precision  of  detail  found 
in  the  narrative  cannot  be  traced  to  an  authentic 
source.     Evolution  holds  that  there  was  a  First 


THE  ETHICAL  BACKGROUND  OF  NATURE  69 

Man  in  tlie  sense  that  there  was  a  first  free  moral 
agent,  and  will  not  deny  that  his  dawning  con- 
science must  have  failed  to  secure  from  his  earlier- 
developed  lower  nature  perfect  obedience.  The 
result  was  a  fall,  and  a  schism  in  human  nature 
which  was  widened  afterwards  by  perfectly  explica- 
ble causes  that  will  be  briefly  referred  to  in  a  later 
chapter.  The  sun  wiU  enlarge  the  icicle  which  it 
does  not  destroy. 

It  is  commonly  assumed  that  there  is  a  con- 
tradiction between  the  teachings  of  evolution  and 
those  of  Paul  on  this  subject.  We  hear  of  the- 
ologians who  are  said  to  have  given  up  the  apos- 
tle's version  of  the  fall  of  man,  and  to  have  sub- 
stituted for  it  the  theory  of  development.  But 
there  is  no  necessary  conflict  between  the  two. 
That  Darwin  and  Milton  are  at  odds  on  this  sub- 
ject is  indubitably  true.  That  the  primordial 
ancestor  of  the  human  race  was  a  being  of  large 
mental  and  moral  nature,  who  by  a  sin  has  de- 
graded the  whole  mass  of  his  descendants  below 
the  same  high  level,  is  whoUy  irreconcilable  with 
the  views  set  forth  in  "The  Descent  of  Man." 
But  this  is  a  Miltonic  conception,  and  is  not  man- 
ifestly either  Pauline  or  Biblical.  As  has  just 
been  shown,  the  evolutionist  himself  can  find  no- 
thing inconsistent  with  his  beliefs  in  the  theory 
that  man  has  fallen.  What  he  is  unwilling  to 
admit  is  that  man  has  fallen  from  Miltonic  heights 
of  character.  That  the  fall  consisted  in  a  first  act 
of  disobedience   to   an  incipient  sense   of   moral 


70    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

obligation  is  inconsistent  neither  with  tlie  language 
in  which  Paul  describes  it,  nor,  as  I  am  persuaded, 
with  any  theological  inferences  that  he  derives 
from  it. 

The  second  objection  to  the  theory  that  there  is 
a  benevolent  power  above  nature  is  suggested  by 
the  presence  of  pain  in  the  world.  Much  use  is 
made  by  the  materialist  of  the  alleged  cruelty  of 
nature,  of  the  fact  that  the  lower  animals  are  con- 
strained by  the  very  necessities  of  their  organism  to 
prey  upon  one  another.  The  ceaseless  tragedies  of 
the  jungle  and  the  ocean  are  gathered  together  into 
a  single  horrible  picture  of  slaughter  and  suffering. 
"  We  find  that  more  than  one  half  of  the  species 
which  have  survived  the  ceaseless  struggle  are  par- 
asitic in  their  habits,  lower  and  insentient  forms 
of  life  feasting  on  higher  and  sentient  forms  ;  we 
find  teeth  and  talons  whetted  for  slaughter,  hooks 
and  suckers  moulded  for  torment,  —  everywhere  a 
reign  of  terror,  hunger,  sickness,  with  oozing  blood 
and  quivering  limbs,  with  gasping  breath  and  eyes 
of  innocence  that  dimly  close  in  deaths  of  cruel  tor- 
ture "  (Ilomanes).i  It  is  thus  made  to  seem  that 
there  must  have  been  something  illogical  or  some 
want  of  balance  in  the  man 

"  Who  trusted  God  was  love  indeed, 
And  love  creation's  final  law  — 
Though  Nature,  red  in  tooth  and  claw 
With  ravin,  shrieked  against  his  creed." 

But  there  is  a  fallacy  in  this  argument  which 
few  seem  to  detect.     It  consists  in   the  tacit  as- 

1  Thoughts  on  Beligion,  p.  78.     (Open  Court  Pub.  Co.,  1895.) 


THE   ETHICAL  BACKGROUND  OF  NATURE     71 

sumption  that  the  pain  of  many  individuals  can  be 
added  up,  and  that  the  result  will  be  a  greater 
amount  of  pain.  The  effect  which  is  produced  on 
a  single  sympathetic  mind  by  the  contemplation  of 
many  cases  of  suffering  seems  to  have  been  care- 
lessly taken  as  representing  on  a  small  scale  an 
actual  aggregation  of  that  suffering  into  a  vast 
objective  sum  total. 

But  there  is  really  no  more  pain  in  the  world 
than  there  is  in  the  individual  who  suffers  the 
most  pain.  Those  who  combine  in  a  single  mental 
impression  the  pangs  and  torments  of  all  animate 
creation,  and  are  horrified  by  the  thought  of  an 
almost  infinite  misery,  forget  that  the  suffering 
which  seems  to  them  so  vast  is  divided  into  as 
many  parts  as  there  are  sentient  beings  in  the 
world,  and  that  each  of  these  parts  is  subdivided 
in  turn  into  as  many  portions  as  there  have  been 
epochs  of  pain  in  the  individual  life.  The  old 
theory  of  the  atonement,  which  taught  that  the 
vicarious  sufferings  of  Christ  were  equal  to  the 
aggregated  torments  from  which  the  redeemed  were 
saved,  was  founded  on  this  same  curious  fallacy. 
It  would  have  been  enough  for  the  purposes  of  its 
framers  to  maintain  that  the  agony  of  the  Saviour 
was  equal  to  what  would  have  been  the  punitive 
pain  of  the  one  ransomed  soul  which,  but  for  him, 
would  have  suffered  most. 

The  fallacy  here  exposed  is  of  the  same  kind 
as  that  which  many  a  man  perpetrates  when  he 
thinks  of  giving  up  a  proposed  journey  because  it 
seems   too  great  for  his   strength.      The   trouble 


72    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

with  him  is  that  he  contrasts,  in  some  vague  way, 
the  strength  which  he  is  able  to  exert  at  the  pre- 
sent moment  with  the  amount  he  would  have  to 
put  forth  in  order  to  cover,  in  an  instant  of  time, 
the  whole  distance  to  be  traversed.  It  is  by  the 
same  species  of  sophistry  that  we  persuade  our- 
selves that  a  certain  hill  is  too  high  to  be  climbed, 
because  we  allow  our  minds  to  dwell  on  the  height 
only,  and  neglect  to  consider  the  long,  winding, 
and  gradually  mounting  path  by  which  that  height 
is  distributed  into  an  indefinite  number  of  easily 
managed  small  ascents.  One  unconsciously  rea- 
sons in  the  same  false  way  who  despairs  in  the 
morning  of  being  able  to  do  the  work  of  the  day, 
practically  forgetting  that  it  is  not  to  be  accom- 
plished by  a  single  exhaustive  effort,  but  by  suc- 
cessive applications  of  a  not  immoderate  force, 
which  will  be  continually  renewed.  In  other  words, 
men  are  prone  to  ignore  perspective  in  taking  ac- 
count of  the  pain  that  is  in  the  world,  and  to 
forget  that  what  is  present  in  the  individual  mind 
as  a  single  harrowuig  idea  is  really  dispersed  and 
atomized  by  the  countless  individuals  who  experi- 
ence it  and  by  the  sum  total  of  the  various  periods 
in  each  life,  usually  separated  by  long  intervals  of 
peace,  in  which  it  has  been  endured.  They  who 
harass  themselves  by  such  a  misuse  of  the  process 
of  addition  are  hkely  to  suffer  more  through  sym- 
pathy than  most  of  those  whom  they  pity  suffer 
directly. 


THE  ETHICAL  BACKGROUND  OF  NATURE    73 

When  pain  is  thus  considered  it  becomes,  as  a 
rule,  a  relatively  insignificant  experience.  The  ex- 
istence of  the  hunted  bird  or  quadruped  is  not 
unhappy  as  a  whole.  The  helpless  beast  that  per- 
ishes m  the  jaws  of  the  tiger  ends  thus  what  has 
been  in  the  main  a  joyous  career.  The  heartaches 
and  physical  pangs  which,  for  the  time  being,  take 
all  happiness  out  of  human  life,  are  after  all  only 
passing  clouds  in  the  firmament  of  a  generally 
tranquil  existence. 

And  they  would  seem  to  be  as  useful  and  even 
as  indispensable  as  clouds  commonly  are.  If  it  is 
true  that  our  cognitions  are  the  result  of  compari- 
sons, it  is  no  less  so  that  contrasts  quicken  our 
appreciation  of  our  pleasures.  Besides  which,  the 
offices  of  pain  are  for  the  most  part  disciplinary. 
It  goes  hand  in  hand  with  natural  law.  It  is  the 
best  instructor  and  guide  that  one  can  have  who 
aspires  to  walk  in  the  ways  of  pleasantness  and 
in  the  paths  of  peace.  If  it  is  true,  as  Spencer  ^ 
asserts,  that  an  organism  perfectly  adapted  to  its 
environment  would  live  forever,  pain  must  be  con- 
sidered as  a  condition  of  longevity,  for  only  by  its 
sharp  admonitions  can  we  be  made  to  understand 
that  we  are  out  of  harmony  with  the  laws  of  life. 

If  there  is  any  residue  of  suffering  which  can- 
not be  associated  with  a  beneficent  purpose  on  the 
part  of  a  Supreme  Being,  it  can  at  the  most  consti- 
tute an  objection  merely  to  the  doctrine  of  divine 
1  Biology,  p.  88.     (D.  Appleton  &  Co.,  1875.) 


74    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

omnipotence.  It  may  still  leave  the  benevolence 
of  the  First  Cause  untouched.  What  is  meant  by 
Almighty  power,  it  would  not  be  easy  to  say.  It  is 
quite  possible  that  it  should  be  regarded  as  signi- 
fying the  ability  to  do,  not  every  namable  thing, 
but  everything  that  does  not  imply  a  self-contradic- 
tion, or,  as  it  has  also  been  expressed,  the  power  to 
do  everything,  but  not  every  combination  of  things. 
It  may  be  that  there  are  limitations  to  action 
in  the  nature  of  things  which  perfect  knowledge 
would  not  regard  as  inconsistent  with  the  existence 
of  perfect  power.  Few  would  maintain  that  the 
mind  which  is  back  of  all  phenomena  is  not  omnip- 
otent if  it  cannot  cause  a  thing  to  exist  and  not 
exist  at  the  same  time,  or,  to  borrow  an  illustration 
from  a  child,  if  it  cannot  make  a  horse  five  years 
old  in  a  minute.  Even  those  who  would  not  deny 
such  powers  to  the  Absolute  must  admit  that  the 
Absolute  itseK  cannot  be  absolute  and  not  absolute 
at  the  same  time  ;  otherwise,  what  becomes  of  their 
supposed  proof  that  the  First  Cause  is  unknow- 
able? If  it  is  not  cognizable  as  the  absolute,  it 
may  be  known  as  the  not-absolute.  It  would  seem 
impossible,  therefore,  to  escape  the  conclusion  that 
there  are  facts  inseparable  from  being  in  its  es- 
sence which  must  be  taken  into  account  when  we 
define  omnipotence.  We  may  understand  by  it 
the  ability  to  do,  not  everything  that  can  be  ex- 
pressed in  language,  but  everything  that  the  essen- 
tials of  existence  do  not  preclude  from  being  ob- 
jects of  power.     And  it  may  be  that  among  these 


THE  ETHICAL  BACKGROUND  OF  NATURE    75 

essentials  is  to  be  reckoned  the  association  of  time 
with  growth  and  of  pain  with  human  development. 
There  is  one  fact,  however,  that  stands  out  with 
marked  distinctness,  and  that  is  that  the  system  of 
forces  and  influences  which  we  call  nature  is  capa- 
ble of  producing  men  of  vast  physical,  mental, 
ethical,  and  spiritual  endowments,  and  that  what 
seems  to  us  the  darker  side  of  hfe  contributes  most 
powerfully  to  this  result.  Courage  cannot  be  de- 
veloped without  danger,  nor  fortitude  without  pain, 
nor  patience  without  suffering,  nor  heroism  with- 
out the  shadow  of  death.  If  it  is  true,  as  Huxley  ^ 
asserts,  that  "  an  animal  cannot  make  protoplasm, 
but  must  take  it  ready-made  from  some  other  ani- 
mal or  some  plant,  —  the  animal's  highest  feat  of 
constructive  chemistry  being  to  convert  dead  pro- 
toplasm into  that  living  matter  of  life  which  is 
appropriate  to  itself,"  the  teleological  justification 
of  the  tragedies  of  the  forest  and  the  seas  does  not 
seem  far  to  seek.  And  if  it  be  objected  that  the 
ravenous  species  which  have  thus  come  into  exist- 
ence have  no  utility  that  would  render  defensible 
the  massacres  of  lower  organisms  by  which  they 
have  been  built  up,  let  it  not  be  forgotten  that  it 
was  by  ceaseless  conflicts  with  them  that  primitive 
man  acquired  some  of  the  most  commanding  traits 
of  his  manhood.  It  was  profoundly  appropriate 
that  the  author  of  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis 
should  include  in  the  first  command  given  by  God 
to  man  a  direction  to  subdue  the  earth  and  to  have 

^  Physical  Basis  of  Life. 


76    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

dominion  over  every  living  thing  that  moveth  upon 
it,  for  he  thus  indicates  one  of  the  earliest  factors 
of  human  development.  It  was  by  pitting  his 
strength,  courage,  and  cunning  against  those  of 
the  wild  animals  among  which  he  dwelt  that  man 
was  able  to  cultivate  the  qualities  that  at  first 
lifted  him  above  them. 

It  would  be  an  almost  endless  undertaking  to 
describe  the  various  mechanical  processes  which 
contribute  to  the  production  of  that  most  compli- 
cated invention,  a  modern  first-class  battleship.  If 
all  the  machinery  that  has  been  needed  in  order  to 
give  shape  and  quality  to  all  the  materials  used 
in  her  construction,  if  all  the  appliances  by  which 
her  plating,  guns,  explosives,  electrical  equipment, 
engines,  fuel,  and  fireproof  woodwork  have  been 
produced  could  be  seen  in  operation  under  one 
roof,  there  are  not  many  minds  that  woidd  not  be 
bewildered  and  helpless  in  the  presence  of  such 
an  endless  multiplicity  of  detail,  not  many  mechan- 
ics, even,  to  whom  some  of  the  processes  might 
not  seem  without  meaning  and  useless. 

"  What  a  piece  of  work  is  man !  how  noble  in 
reason  !  how  infinite  in  faculty  !  in  form  and  mov- 
ing how  express  and  admirable  !  in  action  how  hke 
an  angel !  in  apprehension  how  like  a  god  I  the 
beauty  of  the  world !  the  paragon  of  animals  !  " 
We  may  well  believe  that  the  factory  in  which 
"  this  quintessence  of  dust "  has  been  compounded 
must  be  the  scene  of  many  a  recondite  and  myste- 
rious operation.     We  need   not  think  it  strange 


THE  ETHICAL  BACKGROUND  OF  NATURE    77 

that  a  race  with  infinitely  diversified  mental  and 
moral  traits,  which  has  been  moulded  by  such  in- 
scrutable agencies  as  growth,  heredity,  environ- 
ment, natural  selection,  competition,  etc.,  should 
have  required  for  its  education  the  cooperation  of 
many  processes,  of  which  some  may  seem  to  a  nar- 
row vision  worse  than  useless.  If  the  solar  system, 
with  its  wheels  within  wheels,  is  but  the  assem- 
blage of  lathes  and  pulleys  by  wliich,  beneath  a 
"  majestical  roof  fretted  with  golden  fire,"  the  va- 
rious influences,  physical,  mental,  and  spiritual,  are 
being  shaped  which  are  to  unite  in  forming  a  race 
of  beings  of  unlimited  variety  of  endowment,  of  un- 
speakable beauty  of  attribute,  it  need  not  surprise 
us  if  we  must  guess  at  the  office  of  some  of  the 
machinery  and  fail  utterly  to  explain  the  necessity 
of  much  more.  We  are  certainly  not  able  to  urge 
with  any  show  of  reason  the  pain  that  is  suffered 
in  the  sublime  workshop  as  impugning  the  benevo- 
lence of  the  superintending  Mind,  unless  we  are 
in  a  position  to  affirm  with  confidence  that  the  ulti- 
mate results  will  not  dwarf  it  into  an  insignificant 
consideration,  and  that  it  was  not  made  inevitable 
by  facts  inherent  in  the  nature  of  things. 

We  can  now  leave  this  branch  of  our  subject.  I 
have  tried  to  show  that  it  is  as  rational  to  believe 
that  the  human  race  is  being  shaped  into  the  Hke- 
ness  of  a  superior  parent  mind  as  it  is  to  believe 
the  theory  of  evolution,  because  the  former  belief 
is  a  natural  result  of  proofs  which  the  latter  can- 
not spare.     I  have  shown,  also,  that  this  fact  leads 


78    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

to  the  inference  that  the  Being  whose  existence  is 
thus  rendered  an  object  of  intellectual  apprehen- 
sion is  endued  with  certain  beneficent  moral  attri- 
butes, which  may  be  summed  up  in  the  one  word, 
Love.  He  possesses,  therefore,  qualities  which 
identify  him  with  the  God  of  the  New  Testament, 
and  we  may  now  properly  call  him  by  that  name. 


CHAPTER   IV 

INDUCTIVE   THEISM 

Knowledge  has  been  defined  as  "  the  percep- 
tion of  the  agreement  or  disagreement  of  two  ideas." 
We  can  know  a  thing  only  as  we  become  aware  of 
its  likeness  or  unlikeness  to  something  else.  Rea- 
soning, which  has  for  its  object  the  acquisition  or 
the  impartation  of  knowledge,  presupposes  this 
fact.  It  is  a  process  which  consists  substantially 
in  comparing  things  with  things.  It  is  a  method 
of  discovering  or  communicating  new  truths  by 
tracing  out  their  relations  to  other  truths  which 
are  already  known. 

There  are  two  principal  ways  in  which  it  can 
arrive  at  knowledge  :  it  may  infer  particular  truths 
from  others  which  are  more  general,  or  it  may  re- 
verse the  process.  It  may  show  that  certain  facts 
belong  to  a  definite  class  whose  characteristics  are 
already  known,  or  it  may  affirm  that  the  charac- 
teristics of  those  facts  pertain  to  the  whole  class  to 
which  the  facts  belong.  The  former  method  is 
called  Deduction  ;  the  latter.  Induction.  These, 
however,  are  only  approximate  definitions,  but  they 
will  serve  my  purpose.  "  When  the  conclusion  is 
more  general  than  the  largest  of  the  premises,  the 


80    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

argument  is  commonly  called  Induction  ;  when  less 
general,  or  equally  general,  it  is  Eatiocination " 
(^.  e..  Deduction)  (Mill).i 

As  the  terms  above  used  are  very  common,  and 
as  it  is  desirable  that  the  distinction  between  them 
should  be  kept  in  mind,  I  may  be  pardoned  if  I 
explain  them  a  little  more  fully. 

When  a  man,  by  the  exercise  of  his  reasoning 
faculty,  has  demonstrated  that  a  particular  fact 
which  he  is  investigating  may  be  coordinated  with 
a  number  of  other  facts  which  resemble  one 
another  so  closely  that  they  have  been  erected  into 
a  group,  he  performs  an  act  of  Deduction.  The 
mental  operation  which  has  taken  place  may  be 
expressed  in  what  is  called  a  syllogism.  Tliis  con- 
sists of  three  separate  propositions :  one,  which  is 
called  the  major  premise^  is  to  the  effect  that  any 
object  which  possesses  a  certain  characteristic  be- 
longs to  a  particular  class ;  another,  called  the 
mincyr  premise^  is  that  one  or  more  objects  which 
are  not  at  the  moment  conceived  as  belonging  to 
that  class  have  that  characteristic ;  and  the  third, 
called  the  conclusion^  is  that  the  object  or  objects 
mentioned  are,  therefore,  to  be  included  in  that 
class.  One  or  more  of  these  three  terms,  as  they  are 
also  called,  may  be  expressed  negatively,  but  the 
principle  remains  the  same.  This,  as  stated  by 
Mr.  MiU,2  is  :  "  Whatever  has  any  mark  has  that 
which  it  is  a  mark  of  ;  "  or,  where  both  premises 
are  universal,  "  Whatever  is  a  mark  of  any  mark 
1  Logic,  p.  125.  2  ii^id,^  p.  138. 


INDUCTIVE  THEISM  81 

is  a  mark  of  that  wliich  this  last  is  a  mark  of." 
All  men  are  mortal ;  the  president  is  a  man  ; 
therefore,  the  president  is  mortal,  —  is  a  syllogism. 
It  contains  a  declaration  that  whatever  possesses 
a  certain  characteristic  belongs  to  a  well-known 
class  ;  another,  that  an  individual  who  is  designated 
has  that  characteristic  ;  and  a  third,  that  he  is  con- 
sequently to  be  assigned  to  that  class.  To  borrow 
Mr.  Mill's  phraseology,  the  attributes  of  man  are 
a  mark  of  the  attribute  mortality  ;  the  president 
has  the  attributes  of  man  ;  therefore,  he  has  the 
attribute  mortality. 

A  very  large  portion  of  human  knowledge  has 
been  obtained  by  this  method.  The  results  of 
arithmetical,  of  geometrical,  and  of  mathematical 
reasoning  in  general  have  been  reached  deduc- 
tively, by  a  mental  process  which  could  be  ex- 
pressed by  a  chain  of  syllogisms.  In  geometry, 
for  example,  the  original  major  premise  may  be 
found  in  a  table  of  axioms,  which  is  made  up  of 
such  indubitable  truths  as,  "  The  sums  of  equals 
are  equal."  "  Things  which  are  equal  to  the  same 
thing  are  equal  to  each  other,"  etc.  A  minor  pre- 
mise asserts  that  certain  lines,  angles,  etc.,  sustain 
to  one  another  the  relation  described  in  the  axiom  ; 
and  the  conclusion  follows  that  the  fact  affirmed 
in  the  axiom  is  true  of  them.  This  conclusion 
itseK  then  becomes  a  premise  in  a  new  syllogism. 

If  errors  are  successfully  guarded  against,  the 
results  of  this  process  are  absolutely  trustworthy. 
If  the  assertions  in  the  premises  are  correct,  the 


82    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

conclusion  follows  as  a  matter  of  course,  and  is  be- 
yond suspicion.  But  on  the  other  hand,  an  error 
in  either  premise  perpetuates  itself  and  vitiates 
the  result.  Mathematical  reasoning  owes  its  pro- 
verbial certainty  to  the  fact  that  it  begins  with 
premises  which  are  beyond  question,  and  uses  no 
conclusion  for  a  subsequent  premise  which  is  not 
necessitated  by  the  premises  from  which  it  is  de- 
rived. A  notable  attempt  was  made  by  Spinoza  to 
attain  the  same  certainty  in  philosophical  reason- 
ing. His  conclusions  are  said  to  be  as  rigorously 
established  by  his  premises  as  are  any  of  the  the- 
orems of  geometry.  But  it  is  objected  that  the 
major  premise  with  which  he  starts  is  so  far  from 
being  a  self-evident  or  demonstrable  truth  that  it  is 
a  proposition  which  cannot  confidently  be  affirmed 
to  be  either  true  or  false  ;  so  that  the  large  results 
which  he  reaches  in  the  end  are  not  proved,  but 
have  in  them  the  same  uncertainty  that  attaches  to 
the  premise  with  which  he  began.  But  deduction, 
when  properly  used,  yields  facts  which  are  incon- 
trovertible, and  as  has  been  said,  the  world  is 
indebted  to  it  for  much  of  the  knowledge  which 
it  possesses. 

The  inductive  reasoner  arrives  at  his  conclusions 
in  a  different  way.  When  he  finds  that  a  particu- 
lar fact  is  associated  with  all  the  facts  of  a  certain 
group  which  have  been  noted  by  him,  he  infers 
that  it  is  also  associated  with  the  remaining  facts 
of  the  same  group  which  have  not  come  under  his 
observation.     If  he  thrusts  his  hand  into  a  barrel 


INDUCTIVE  THEISM  83 

and  draws  out  of  it  a  handful  of  corn,  he  has  no 
doubt  that  he  has  sampled  a  barrel  of  that  kind 
of  grain.  Everything  in  his  palm  is  a  kernel  of 
corn,  and  he  naturally  infers  that  the  same  is  true 
of  every  other  thing  in  the  class  represented  by 
the  contents  of  the  barrel.  If  he  picks  up  in  suc- 
cession a  number  of  stones  on  the  beach  and  finds 
that  they  are  all  more  or  less  roimded,  he  forms  the 
opinion  that  all  the  pebbles  on  the  beach  have  the 
same  characteristic.  In  either  case  he  performs 
an  induction.  A  certain  fact  can  be  affirmed  of  a 
limited  number  of  things  which  he  has  observed, 
and  he  concludes  that  it  can  be  affirmed,  with 
equal  truth,  of  all  other  things  of  the  same  class. 

It  is  by  reasoning  like  this  that  many  of  the 
most  commonplace  conclusions  of  every-day  life  are 
reached.  The  dairyman  who  thrusts  his  steel  to 
the  bottom  of  a  tub  and  exhibits  the  thin  cylinder 
of  butter  which  it  brings  out  expects  that  his  cus- 
tomer will  perform  an  induction,  that  he  will  judge 
of  the  quality  of  the  whole  from  that  of  the  small 
part  which  he  has  seen.  The  merchant  who  orders 
goods  from  the  samples  of  a  commercial  traveler 
has  simply  resorted  to  an  act  of  inductive  reason- 
ing. The  fruiterer  who  puts  his  best  strawberries 
on  top  assumes  that  purchasers  will  reason  induc- 
tively. So  does  the  farmer  who  places  a  high 
grade  of  wheat  only  in  the  mouth  of  each  bag. 

None  of  the  inductions  above  described  would 
be  of  any  very  great  weight.  They  would  not  be 
regarded  as  scientific  inductions.     They  would  not 


84    THE  RATIONAL   BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

satisfy  the  rigorous  requirements  of  scientific  men. 
It  is  possible  that  the  barrel  may  have  at  the  bot- 
tom something  besides  corn.  It  is  conceivable 
that  the  stones  might  have  been  rounded  by  forces 
which  operated  only  in  a  very  limited  area.  The 
dairyman  may  have  accidentally  or  purposely 
missed  some  inferior  butter.  The  samples  ap- 
proved by  the  merchant  may  have  been  of  far 
better  quality  than  the  rest  of  the  stock  from  which 
they  were  selected.  The  sources  of  error  in  the 
remaining  examples  are  sufficiently  obvious.  Ver- 
ifications of  each  of  these  inductions  would  be 
needed  before  it  would  possess  anything  like  cer- 
tainty. But  these  illustrations  will  afford  a  very 
good  idea  of  the  nature  of  the  inductive  process, 
of  the  mental  operation  by  which  attributes  that 
are  known  to  belong  to  one  or  more  objects  are 
ascribed  to  a  much  larger  number  which  have  not 
been  individually  examined. 

Four  methods  are  employed  by  the  inductive 
reasoner,  and  they  constitute  "  the  only  possible 
modes  of  experimental  inquiry  —  of  direct  induc- 
tion a  posteriori^  as  distinguished  from  deduction  " 
(Mill).i  Apart  from  them  there  are  no  mental 
operations  by  which  observation  and  experiment 
can  be  made  to  jdeld  inferential  knowledge.  They 
are  known  as  the  methods  of  Agreement,  of  Differ- 
ence, of  Concomitant  Variations,  and  of  Residues. 
There  is  a  fifth,  called  the  Joint  Method  of  Agree- 
ment and  Difference,  which  is  merely  a  combina- 

1  Logic,  p.  271. 


INDUCTIVE  THEISM  85 

tion  of  the  two  first  named.  The  canons  and  ex- 
amples by  which  the  first  four  are  illustrated  in 
Mill's  ''  Logic  "  are  reproduced  below. 

The  regulating  principle  of  the  Method  of 
Agreement  may  be  expressed  thus :  — 

"  If  two  or  more  instances  of  the  phenomenon 
under  investigation  have  only  one  circumstance  in 
common,  the  circumstance  in  which  alone  all  the 
instances  agree  is  the  cause  (or  effect)  of  the 
given  phenomenon." 

For  example,  let  the  phenomenon  be  crystalliza- 
tion. "  We  compare  instances  in  which  bodies 
are  known  to  assume  crystalline  structure,  but 
which  have  no  other  point  of  agreement ;  and  we 
find  them  to  have  one  —  and  as  far  as  we  can  ob- 
serve, only  one  —  antecedent  in  common :  the  depo- 
sition of  a  solid  matter  from  a  liquid  state,  either 
a  state  of  fusion  or  of  solution.  We  conclude, 
therefore,  that  the  sohdification  of  a  substance 
from  a  liquid  state  is  an  invariable  antecedent  of 
its  crystallization." 

The  canon  of  the  Method  of  Difference  is  as 
follows  :  — 

"If  an  instance  in  which  the  phenomenon  under 
investigation  occurs  and  an  instance  in  which  it 
does  not  occur  have  every  circumstance  in  common 
save  one,  that  one  occurring  only  in  the  former, 
the  circiunstance  in  which  alone  the  two  instances 
differ  is  the  effect  or  the  cause  or  an  indispensa- 
ble part  of  the  cause  of  the  phenomenon." 

"It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  give  examples  of  a 


86    THE  RATIONAL   BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

logical  process  to  which  we  owe  almost  all  the  in- 
ductive conclusions  we  draw  in  daily  life.  When 
a  man  is  shot  tlu:ough  the  heart,  it  is  by  this  method 
we  know  that  it  was  the  gunshot  which  killed  him  : 
for  he  was  in  the  fullness  of  life  immediately  be- 
fore, all  circumstances  being  the  same,  except  the 
wound." 

The  following  is  the  canon  for  the  Method  of 
Concomitant  Variations  :  — 

"  Whatever  phenomenon  varies  in  any  manner 
whenever  another  phenomenon  varies  in  any  par- 
ticular manner  is  either  a  cause  or  an  effect  of 
that  phenomenon,  or  is  connected  with  it  through 
some  fact  of  causation." 

"  That  the  oscillations  of  the  pendulum  are 
caused  by  the  earth  is  proved  by  similar  evidence. 
These  oscillations  take  place  between  equidistant 
points  on  two  sides  of  a  line,  which,  being  perpen- 
dicular to  the  earth,  varies  with  every  variation  in 
the  earth's  position,  either  in  space  or  relatively  to 
the  object." 

The  canon  for  the  Method  of  Residues  is  as 
follows  :  — 

"  Subduct  from  any  phenomenon  such  part  as  is 
known  by  previous  inductions  to  be  the  effect  of  cer- 
tain antecedents,  and  the  residue  of  the  phenome- 
non is  the  effect  of  the  remaining  antecedents." 

"  For  example,  the  return  of  the  comet  predicted 
by  Professor  Encke  a  great  many  times  in  succes- 
sion, and  the  general  good  agreement  of  its  calcu- 
lated with  its  observed  place  during  any  one  of  its 


INDUCTIVE  THEISM  87 

periods  of  visibility,  would  lead  us  to  say  that  its 
gravitation  toward  the  sun  and  planets  is  the  sole 
and  sufficient  cause  of  all  the  phenomena  of  its 
orbital  motion ;  but  when  the  effect  of  this  cause 
is  strictly  calculated  and  subducted  from  the  ob- 
served motion,  there  is  found  to  remain  behind  a 
residual  phenomenon^  which  would  never  have 
been  otherwise  ascertained  to  exist,  which  is  a 
small  anticipation  of  the  time  of  its  reappearance, 
or  a  diminution  of  its  periodic  time,  which  cannot 
be  accounted  for  by  gravity,  and  whose  cause  is 
therefore  to  be  inquired  into.  Such  an  anticipa- 
tion would  be  caused  by  the  resistance  of  a  medium 
disseminated  through  the  celestial  regions ;  and  as 
there  are  other  good  reasons  for  believing  this  to 
be  a  vera  causa  (an  actually  existing  antecedent), 
it  has  therefore  been  ascribed  to  such  a  resistance." 

(The  fact  that  a  different  explanation  of  the 
phenomenon  was  afterward  given  does  not,  of 
course,  impair  the  value  of  the  illustration.) 

Every  fact  that  science  has  learned  inductively 
has  been  discovered  or  tested  by  one  or  more  of 
these  methods.  The  determination  of  the  cause  of 
dew  involved  the  use  of  all  of  them  but  one.  And 
it  is  through  the  rigorous  application  of  them  that 
modern  science  has  been  created.  Any  one  who 
desires  to  understand  the  secret  of  the  confidence 
which  scientific  men  repose  in  the  results  at  which 
they  have  arrived  would  do  well  to  read  the  chap- 
ters in  Mill's  "Logic," or  in  the  work  of  Professor 
Bain,  which  treat  of  the  process  of  reasoning  now 


88    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

being  discussed.  Induction  is  nothing  new.  It  is 
not  a  modern  discovery.  It  has  been  known  ever 
since  men  began  to  reason.  Nor,  as  is  commonly 
supposed,  did  Bacon  teach  men  to  search  for  truth 
by  this  method.  They  were  doing  so  long  before 
his  time.  His  chief  service  to  modern  science  con- 
sists in  the  fact  that  he  was  instrumental  in  doing 
away  with  the  inadequate  conception  of  induction 
which  had  previously  prevailed,  and  in  laying  the 
foundation  of  the  accurate  and  exacting  methods 
which  are  now  yielding  such  satisfactory  results. 

With  these  methods  the  world  is  becoming  fa- 
miliarized. It  is  learning  to  appreciate  the  cer- 
tainty which  inheres  in  the  conclusions  of  science, 
and  to  crave  it  for  aU  of  its  beliefs.  There  is  a 
well-nigh  universal  demand  on  the  part  of  think- 
ing men  for  scientific  proof  of  the  propositions 
to  which  their  assent  is  asked.  It  is  a  character- 
istic of  the  age  that  beliefs  which  rest  on  insuffi- 
cient foundations  are  mercilessly  swept  away  and 
consigned  to  the  limbo  of  intellectual  rubbish. 
Whether  this  growing  desire  for  demonstrable 
knowledge  is  not,  in  some  instances,  being  carried 
to  excess  was  considered  in  the  first  chapter.  I 
there  incidentally  discussed  the  question  whether 
the  demand  for  incontrovertible  proof  is  always 
laudable,  and  always  characteristic  of  the  most 
valuable  minds.  That  it  is  prevalent,  however, 
and  is  determining  the  attitude  which  many  per- 
sons assume  towards  various  objects  of  belief  is 
undeniable. 


INDUCTIVE  THEISM  89 

In  no  department  of  human  thought  is  it  more 
conspicuous  and  important  than  in  that  of  theology. 
The  traditional  arguments  for  many,  if  not  all,  of 
the  doctrines  held  as  fundamental  by  the  Christian 
Church  are  impatiently  waved  aside  by  men  who 
have  become  accustomed  to  the  precision  of  scien- 
tific reasoning.  The  theologian  who  should  claim 
for  his  system  a  place  in  the  category  of  indubita- 
ble facts  on  no  other  ground  than  that  on  which, 
perhaps,  he  accepted  it,  would  cut  but  a  sorry  fig- 
ure when  defending  it  against  objectors  who  take 
nothing  for  granted,  but  oppose  an  unwavering 
skepticism  to  every  proposition  which  is  at  all 
open  to  doubt.  He  conceives  a  new  idea  of  what 
is  meant  by  proof  when  he  leaves  behind  him  the 
seminary  —  in  which  he  may  have  been  neither  in- 
clined nor  encouraged  to  question  the  statements 
of  liis  theological  instructor  —  and  undertakes  to 
demonstrate  his  beliefs  to  men  whose  mental  atti- 
tude is  one,  not  of  good-natured  acquiescence,  but 
of  hard-headed  incredulity.  It  is  evident  that 
whatever  may  be  the  grounds  on  which  religious 
confidence  should  properly  rest,  it  cannot  but  com- 
mand a  larger  respect  on  the  part  of  thinking 
men  if  it  can  be  shown  to  be  justified  by  strictly 
scientific  methods. 

The  belief  in  the  existence  of  God  has  rested,  in 
many  minds,  on  an  induction.  Because  the  com- 
ponent parts  of  the  human  eye,  for  example,  are 
alike  in  the  single  fact  that  each  cooperates  with 
the  others  in  producing  sight,  it  is  inferred  that 


90     THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

intelligence  is  an  element  of  their  common  cause. 
But  even  before  the  hypothesis  of  natural  selec- 
tion had  attained  its  present  popularity,  this  in- 
duction, being  an  instance  of  the  Method  of  Agree- 
ment, was  not  held  by  so  candid  a  logician  as  John 
Stuart  MiU  to  create  more  than  a  strong  proba- 
bility ;  and  in  our  own  time  its  force  is  regarded  by 
many  as  having  been  wholly  vitiated  by  the  theory 
that  what  we  caU  marks  of  design  in  nature  are 
merely  accidental  adjustments  which  have  become 
noticeable  only  because  they  have  preserved  the 
species  in  which  they  exist,  that  every  adaptation 
of  means  to  end  under  natural  law  presupposes 
countless  failures  to  accomplish  the  same  thing. 

It  is  urged,  for  example,  that  if  the  horse's  hoof 
is  admirably  suited  to  the  animal's  habits,  this  is  not 
because  it  was  created  with  reference  to  them,  but 
because  innumerable  horses  or  ancestral  equine 
forms  whose  feet  were  more  or  less  differently 
shaped  were  placed,  in  consequence,  at  a  disadvan- 
tage which  eliminated  them  from  the  list  of  living 
species.  The  anatomist  does  not  now  assume  that 
the  human  body  is  a  perfect  mechanism,  every  part 
of  which  was  intended  to  serve  some  useful  purpose. 
He  holds  that  the  appendix,  for  example,  is  a  use- 
less survival  of  a  more  primitive  organ,  and  that  a 
man  is  better  off  without  than  with  it. 

If  a  charge  of  buckshot  were  to  be  fired  at  a 
target  and  one  should  lodge  in  the  very  centre  of 
the  bull's  eye,  it  would  be  only  a  chance  shot,  an 
accident.     The  man  who  had  fired  the  gun  would 


INDUCTIVE  THEISM  91 

not  be  confident  that  he  could  repeat  his  success 
in  a  score  of  trials ;  and  if  he  should  at  last  suc- 
ceed in  doing  so,  he  would  know  that  the  event 
was  no  proof  of  skill  on  his  part,  but  merely  a 
stroke  of  good  luck  which,  on  the  theory  of  prob- 
abilities, would  be  sure  to  happen  if  he  should  con- 
tinue his  practice  long  enough.  And  yet,  if  all 
the  other  shot-marks  on  the  target  should  be  oblit- 
erated, any  person  who  was  ignorant  of  the  cir- 
cumstances would  suppose  that  that  shot  had  been 
placed  there  by  an  expert  rifleman.  He  would 
argue  that  some  one  had  designed  to  plant  a  bullet 
in  the  exact  centre  of  the  target,  and  had  done  so 
at  his  first  and  only  attempt. 

So,  if  the  infinite  number  of  variations  which 
have  taken  place  in  the  forms  and  functions  of  all 
the  living  creatures  that  have  ever  dwelt  on  the 
earth  could  be  set  before  us  at  once,  and  we  should 
then  realize  how  many  of  them  might  be  said  to 
show  no  marks  of  supreme  wisdom,  because  they 
had  failed  to  preserve  those  organic  forms  in  which 
they  occurred,  we  might  see  some  plausibility  in 
the  argument  that  those  which  had  the  opposite 
effect  and  have  consequently  been  perpetuated 
were  only  so  many  lucky  hits,  that  they  appear  to 
have  been  the  result  of  a  definite  and  skillful  aim 
only  because  the  infinitely  more  numerous  swarm 
of  misses  has  been  wiped  away  by  the  oblivion  in 
which  nature  is  wont  to  hide  her  failures. 

Whatever  force  there  may  be  in  these  considera- 
tions, —  and  I  think  it  has  been  very  much  exag- 


92    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

gerated,  —  they  do  undoubtedly  weaken,  to  some 
minds,  the  old  inductive  argument  for  the  existence 
of  God,  and  have  led  even  some  able  theists  to  deny 
that  there  are  in  nature  any  evidences  of  design 
whatever.  But  we  need  not,  on  this  account,  de- 
spair of  enlisting  in  the  support  of  our  theism  that 
method  of  reasoning  which  has  had  such  signal 
triumphs  in  so  many  different  fields  of  investiga- 
tion. We  need  not  fear  lest  our  belief  in  a  Su- 
preme Being  shall  be  justly  deemed  unscientific 
for  lack  of  rational  defenses  of  the  kind  that 
scientific  men  approve.  It  is  possible  for  any  one 
to  obtain  or  to  reinforce  a  belief  in  God  by  an 
induction  as  genuine  and  as  broad  as  that  which 
underlies  many  an  undoubted  scientific  fact. 

I  am  perfectly  familiar  with  the  case  of  a  man 
who,  in  his  early  manhood,  became  oppressed  by 
a  sense  of  the  barrenness  of  the  life  he  was  living. 
He  knelt  down  on  a  solitary  shore  where  he  was 
spending  his  vacation,  and  earnestly  prayed  that 
his  existence  might  not  be  wasted.  A  few  weeks 
later,  in  the  dead  of  night,  he  was  startled  and 
terrified  by  a  sudden  conviction  that  it  was  his 
duty  to  enter  the  ministry.  He  was  in  perfect 
health  at  the  time.  He  had  practically  forgotten 
the  vacation  incident  which  has  just  been  described. 
He  was  no  longer  troubled  by  the  emotions  which 
he  had  then  felt.  His  thoughts  were  running  on 
wholly  different  lines.  There  was  no  connection 
that  he  could  trace  between  this  overmastering- 
conviction  and  the  ideas  which  it  had  supjilanted. 


INDUCTIVE  THEISM  93 

The  course  of  action  which  obedience  to  it  would 
necessitate  was  opposed  to  his  natural  inclinations, 
to  the  spirit  of  his  early  training,  and  to  what  he 
knew  would  be  the  wishes  of  his  friends.  He 
passed  the  remainder  of  the  night  in  sleepless 
agony.  For  months  he  lived  under  a  cloud.  But 
although  he  resisted  for  a  long  time  the  inward 
pressure,  hoping  against  hope  that  it  would  at  last 
be  removed  from  him,  he  could  never  free  himself 
from  it.  He  yielded  to  it  in  the  end,  and  the  sac- 
rifice it  cost  him  to  do  so  was  so  great  that  he  was 
even  then  persuaded  that  he  would  be  excused 
from  drinking  the  cup  which  had  been  held  so 
persistently  to  his  lips. 

His  subsequent  career  was  marked  by  a  succes- 
sion of  disappointments,  afflictions,  and  trials  of 
various  kinds.  There  were  moments  in  its  earlier 
stages  when  the  religious  faith  which  had  enabled 
him  to  take  up  his  cross  almost  entirely  failed  him. 
His  life  was  overcast  by  troubles  which  were  so 
frequent  and  so  peculiar  as  to  excite  comment,  but 
which  were  relieved  by  spiritual  experiences  of  an 
exceptional  order,  which  could  not  be  communicated 
to  others.  In  later  years,  as  he  looked  back  over 
the  lights  and  shadows  which  had  so  strangely 
mottled  his  maturer  life,  as  he  considered  the  re- 
sults which  his  experiences  had  produced  in  the 
shape  of  self-knowledge,  motives,  and  character, 
the  one  conviction  that  impressed  itself  on  his 
mind  was  that  he  had  been  led  all  the  while  by  an 
unerring  hand,  that  he  had  been  educated,  in  fact, 


94    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

by  a  benevolent  superintending  mind.  He  was 
accustomed  to  read  the  writings  of  able  materialists 
and  agnostics,  but  was  never  for  any  great  length 
of  time  free  from  the  conviction  that  they  were 
treating  their  subject  from  a  relatively  narrow  and 
rudimentary  point  of  view.  He  was  satisfied  that 
his  theism,  and  to  a  large  degree  his  religious  con- 
fidence in  general,  rested  on  evidence  immeasur- 
ably more  convincing  than  the  arguments  which 
these  writers  opposed  to  the  most  important  of  his 
beliefs. 

Now,  what  was  the  mental  process  by  which  he 
arrived  at  his  ultimate  religious  assurance?  It 
was  an  induction  pure  and  simple.  He  took  with 
him  into  practical  life  a  certain  conception  of  God, 
and  tested  it  by  the  countless  facts  of  a  subsequent 
and  protracted  experience.  The  whole  of  his  later 
career  was  a  succession  of  experiments  which  he 
was  forced  to  perform  without  any  special  sense  of 
their  significance  at  the  time,  and  which  combined 
in  the  end  to  corroborate  all  that  was  essential 
in  his  previous  traditionary  belief.  He  employed 
unwittingly  over  and  over  again  all  the  recog- 
nized canons  of  experimental  inquiry.  The  four 
methods  of  induction  which  have  already  been 
described  could  all  be  identified  in  the  mental 
operations  which  had  converted  his  original  faith 
into  what  would  be  termed,  in  any  other  field  of 
research,  scientific  knowledge.  He  was  able  to 
eliminate,  by  the  extent  and  variety  of  his  experi- 
ences, errors  of  inference  which  might  be  due  to 


INDUCTIVE  THEISM  95 

mere  coincidence  or  to  morbid  physical  conditions. 
There  was  nothing  lacking  in  this  diversified  and 
elaborate  though  unintentional  process  of  investi- 
gation which  would  distinguish  it,  in  any  impor- 
tant particular,  from  that  by  which  almost  any 
accepted  scientific  fact  has  been  established. 

Now,  the  case  of  this  man  is  not  an  isolated  one. 
It  belongs  to  a  class  which  is  very  numerous,  and 
it  is  far  from  being  exceptional  in  its  own  class. 
It  was  Paul's^  belief  that  God  had  made  men 
that,  they  might  feel  after  him  and  find  him. 
Some  such  process  as  that  which  has  just  been  de- 
scribed seems  to  be  suggested  by  these  words.  It 
is  so  often  repeated  on  a  larger  or  smaller  scale, 
and  so  uniformly  with  the  same  results,  that  we 
are  warranted  in  affirming  that  it  will  always  yield 
them.  The  secret  of  the  influence  wielded  by  the 
prophet  and  the  preacher  lies  in  the  fact  that  they 
have  made  personal  and  profound  investigations 
along  this  line.  The  facts  of  science,  for  most 
men,  rest  largely  on  testimony.  Almost  all  who 
receive  them  do  so  on  the  authority  of  certain  in- 
dividuals, relatively  few  in  number,  who  have 
experimentally  proved  them.  The  only  claim  to 
superior  credibility  which  these  facts  have,  when 
compared  with  many  others  that  are  believed,  is  in 
the  circumstance  that  they  may  be  tested  at  will 
by  scores  of  competent  persons  if  the  discoveries 
are  called  in  question.  So  there  are  always  men 
who  have  spent  a  considerable  portion  of  their 

^  Acts  xvii.  27. 


96    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

lives  in  testing  experimentally  the  teachings  of 
theism.  They  may  be  classed  with  the  original 
investigators  in  other  fields  of  knowledge.  They 
have  acquired  an  equal  right  to  say  of  the  results 
of  their  researches,  "  We  speak  that  we  do  know, 
and  bear  witness  of  that  we  have  seen,"  ^  and  to 
demand  that  their  statements  in  regard  to  the 
particular  subject  in  question  be  not  rejected  ex- 
cept by  those  who  have  honestly  and  thoroughly 
performed  the  same  experiments  and  have  fairly 
drawn  from  them  a  different  conclusion. 

The  scientific  method  of  learning  the  truth  of 
theism  is  closely  analogous  to  that  by  which  a  man 
may  sometimes  prove  inductively,  contrary  perhaps 
to  the  opinion  of  his  physician,  that  the  influence 
of  a  certain  locality  is  the  principal  cause  of  his 
good  health.  He  was  brought  up  in  it,  perhaps, 
and  although  born  with  a  feeble  constitution,  was 
always  weU  there,  notwithstanding  indefinite  and 
even  careless  changes  in  dress,  diet,  and  mode  of 
living.  This  is  the  Method  of  Agreement.  He 
begins  to  deteriorate  physically  when  he  leaves  the 
place,  even  though  he  takes  up  his  abode  in  a 
locality  which  the  experience  of  thousands  has 
shown  to  be  perfectly  salubrious,  and  which  is 
indistinguishable  from  the  one  which  he  has  left 
except  in  the  mere  matter  of  geographical  situa- 
tion. Here  is  the  principle  of  the  Method  of  Dif- 
ference. He  may  extend  the  use  of  it  by  visiting 
all  manner  of  mineral  springs  and  health  resorts, 

1  John  iii.  11, 


INDUCTIVE   THEISM  97 

regions  of  every  description  which  agree  in  nothing, 
so  far  as  he  can  see,  save  in  the  fact  that  they  are 
not  the  place  which  he  has  temporarily  abandoned. 
Here  we  have  the  Joint  Method  of  Agreement 
and  Difference,  which  has  not  been  previously  de- 
scribed, although  allusion  has  been  made  to  it.  The 
more  nearly  the  climate  in  other  places  visited  by 
him  resembles  the  one  first  mentioned,  the  better 
he  is.  There  we  have  the  Method  of  Concomitant 
Variations.  The  medicine  that  helps  him  when  at 
home  is  less  beneficial  when  he  is  elsewhere.  Here 
is  the  Method  of  Residues.  As  has  been  already 
shown  in  a  quotation  from  MiU's  "  Logic,"  there 
are  no  other  ways  of  reasoning  by  induction.  He 
has  tried  these  methods  so  many  times  that  he  is 
warranted  in  affirming  that  the  conclusion  he  has 
derived  from  them  is  entitled,  so  far  as  he  is  con- 
cerned, to  all  the  authority  of  a  scientific  fact. 

It  is  obvious  that  this  conclusion  cannot  be  veri- 
fied by  any  experiments  that  may  be  performed  in 
the  same  locality  by  another  invalid,  because  there 
are  no  means  of  knowing  that  two  different  consti- 
tutions are  precisely  alike.  Although  such  gen- 
eral propositions  as  that  a  dry  climate  is  beneficial 
to  persons  of  consumptive  tendencies  may  be  experi- 
mentally tested  by  more  than  one  person,  the  ques- 
tion whether  a  particular  individual  will  improve 
in  it  can  be  determined  by  himself  alone,  and 
others  can  verify  his  conclusions  only  by  observing 
the  effects  wrought  upon  him  by  his  repeated  ex- 
periments.    But  no  one  would  doubt  that  a  man 


98    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

whose  conviction  that  he  needed  to  live  in  a  cer- 
tain locality  is  grounded  in  such  a  series  of  facts 
as  is  indicated  in  the  example  above  given  has  per- 
formed a  valid  induction  and  has  a  right  to  regard 
his  conclusion  as  scientifically  proved.  The  proofs 
of  the  existence  of  God  which  are  derived  from 
personal  experience  each  one  must  get  for  himself, 
but  any  one  may  obtain  them.  The  concurrent 
testimony  of  innumerable  witnesses  is  ample  war- 
rant for  affirming  that  any  man  who  will  found 
his  life  on  the  hypothesis  that  the  events  of  that 
life  will  be  so  controlled  by  an  objective  intelli- 
gence as  to  develop  indefinitely  those  parts  of  his 
nature  which  he  recognizes  as  best  deserving  to  be 
called  divine,  and  who  will  pursue  that  course  of 
self-sacrifice  and  spiritual  living  by  which  those 
spiritual  authorities  who  are  deemed  the  highest 
declare  that  firm  religious  convictions  are  to  be 
gained,  may  count  on  converting  his  hypothesis, 
in  due  time,  into  what  he  will  find  it  hard  to  dis- 
tinguish, in  point  of  credibility,  from  almost  any 
acknowledged  scientific  fact.  If  his  life  has  been 
shaped  by  the  highest  religious  and  ethical  motives, 
he  enjoys  a  pecuHar  peace  of  mind  and  a  sense 
of  communion  with  God  which  will  find  fitting 
expression  in  those  words  of  Jesus,  "I  am  not 
alone,  but  the  Father  is  with  me."  If  he  forsakes 
those  ideals,  this  consciousness  of  a  sympathetic 
Presence  will  depart  from  him,  or  be  transformed 
into  a  sense  of  divine  disapproval.  And  if  he  di- 
versifies his  experience  still  more  by  abandoning 


INDUCTIVE  THEISM  99 

his  religion  and  substituting  for  it  in  turn  all  of 
the  philosophical  or  scientific  makeshifts  which 
are  offered  in  its  place,  his  sense  of  what  may  be 
called  the  divine  absence  will  only  be  enlarged. 
The  more  thorough  his  consecration  to  Gx)d  be- 
comes, or  the  more  earnestly  he  strives  to  live  a 
divine  life,  the  richer  will  be  his  experiences  con- 
firmatory of  his  belief  in  a  superintending  Provi- 
dence. And  when  he  has  made  all  proper  allow- 
ances for  the  element  of  coincidence  in  the  events 
of  his  religious  life,  and  for  that  of  physical  cau- 
sation in  his  inward  experiences,  there  will  still 
be  left  the  conviction  that  neither  the  former  nor 
the  latter  can  be  explained  without  assuming  the 
agency  of  a  divine  Personality.  Thus,  all  five  of 
the  methods  employed  in  inductive  reasoning  will 
unite  in  producing  within  him  an  assurance  which 
he  will  not,  and  need  not,  hesitate  to  call  know- 
ledge, for  it  is  as  truly  deserving  to  be  so  called  as 
many  a  belief  to  which  the  scientist  does  not  ques- 
tion his  right  to  give  the  name. 

This  argument,  which  is  commonly  called  the 
argument  from  religious  experience,  has  long  been 
known.  It  is  recognized  in  the  New  Testament 
over  and  over  again.  It  is  foreshadowed  in  the 
promise  of  Jesus:  ^  "  If  a  man  love  me,  he  will  keep 
my  word :  and  my  Father  wiU  love  him,  and  we 
will  come  unto  him,  and  make  our  abode  with  him." 
It  is  used  by  Paul  ^  as  a  final  demonstration  of  the 
truth  in  his  words  ;  "  This  only  woidd  I  learn  from 
1  John  xiv.  23.  2  Gal.  iii.  2. 


100    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

you,  Received  ye  the  Spirit  by  the  works  of  the 
law  or  by  the  hearing  of  faith  ?  "  But  there  is  a 
danger  that  it  will  not  command  in  some  quarters, 
under  its  common  name,  all  the  respect  that  it 
really  merits.  It  is  an  argument  from  induction, 
differing  in  no  essential  particular  from  the  method 
of  reasoning  by  which  so  many  of  the  truths  of 
science  have  been  established.  That  it  deals  with 
phenomena  different  from  those  of  matter,  and 
cannot  appeal  to  the  products  of  the  crucible  and 
the  blowpipe,  constitutes  no  flaw  in  it,  for  as  much 
can  be  said  of  social  science  or  of  the  science  of 
the  higher  criticism.  Nor  is  it  anything  to  the 
purpose  to  object  that  the  method  of  proof  which 
has  been  outlined  demands  too  much  in  the  way  of 
self-sacrifice  and  high  moral  conduct.  Self-denial 
and  the  endurance  of  hardship  are  very  frequently 
the  inexorable  conditions  of  scientific  discovery. 
Obviously,  no  man  is  privileged  to  dictate  the  terms 
on  which  truth  may  be  learned,  and  there  is  cer- 
tainly nothing  antecedently  incredible  in  the  state- 
ment that  the  highest  knowledge  can  be  had  only 
through  an  induction  of  the  facts  of  the  highest 
exj)erience. 

Moreover,  nothing  is  required  in  the  way  of 
moral  conduct  and  spiritual  living  on  the  part  of 
any  who  would  obtain  an  experimental  knowledge 
of  God  save  what  is  recognized  by  evolution  as 
inseparable  from  its  own  highest  ethical  standards. 
It  surely  cannot  be  unreasonable  to  ask  and  to 
urge  any  one  who  believes  that  disinterested  love 


INDUCTIVE  THEISM  101 

is  the  highest  attribute  of  man  to  put  in  practice 
that  behef  as  a  means  of  arriving  at  certainty 
regarding  the  existence  and  character  of  a  Supreme 
Being.  Multitudes  of  the  best  and  most  seM-sacri- 
ficing  men  and  women  whom  the  world  has  seen 
have  fomided  their  lives  on  the  belief  that  such  a 
Being  exists,  and  have  had  corroborative  experi- 
ences of  its  truth  which  make  permanent  doubt 
impossible  to  them.  They  affirm  that  the  man 
who  will  consecrate  himself  to  this  belief,  who  will 
show  the  genuineness  of  his  new  purpose  by  ap- 
propriate ethical  and  spiritual  conduct,  who  shall 
have  interest  enough  in  the  success  of  his  spiritual 
ambitions  to  pray  earnestly  and  without  ceasing 
for  divine  help,  who  will  strive  to  be  true  to  his 
lofty  aim  in  temptation  and  in  trial,  and  who  will 
be  willing  to  wait  patiently  for  his  experiences  to 
multiply  and  to  assiune  the  right  perspective,  wiU 
attain  in  the  end  a  religious  conviction  which  will 
be  indistinguishable  from  knowledge ;  and  there  is 
certainly  nothing  so  unreasonable  in  these  condi- 
tions that  they  need  be  regarded  by  any  scientific 
man  as  excluding  him  from  the  infinitely  impor- 
tant field  of  research  to  which  they  pertain. 

And  if  there  are  those  to  whom  this  mode  of 
seeking  after  God  seems  more  scientific  than  reh- 
gious,  who  find  in  it  a  disagreeable  resemblance  to 
the  method  suggested  by  Tyndall  for  testing  the 
utility  of  prayer,  and  to  whom  it  seems  to  reduce 
the  loftiest  objects  of  thought  to  the  level  of  the 
most  selfish  of  human  speculations  and  inquiries, 


102    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

it  may  suffice  to  remind  tliem  that  mere  intellec- 
tual curiosity  is  excluded  as  a  controlling  motive 
from  this  field  of  investigation  by  the  conditions 
attached  to  success  in  it.  There  cannot  be  any- 
thing unworthy  or  spiritually  degrading  in  a  life- 
long effort  to  find  out  God  by  learning  to  conform 
to  an  ideal  will  and  character. 

The  message,  then,  of  Christianity  to  men  of 
science  who  have  only  a  negative  answer  for  the 
Naamathite's  question,^  "  Canst  thou  by  searching 
find  out  God  ?  "  is  simple  and  rational.  It  is  not 
that  they  should  abandon  any  of  the  facts  which 
have  been  scientifically  established,  or  distrust  the 
methods  of  learning  truth  which  have  won  their 
confidence.  It  is  not  even  that  they  should  ac- 
cept propositions  which  are  incapable  of  being 
proved  in  the  only  ways  which  they  recognize  as 
sound.  It  is  merely  that  they  should  extend  their 
researches  into  the  realm  of  religion,  and  employ 
their  favorite  methods  in  testing  the  teachings  of  the 
Christian  faith.  One  of  the  strongest  arguments 
adduced  in  favor  of  evolution  implies  the  existence 
of  a  parental  Mind  which  is  shaping  a  race  of 
beings  into  likeness  to  itself.  The  ethical  traits 
which  are  unfolding  in  the  most  higldy  developed 
natures  in  the  form  of  moral  ideals  and  resulting 
conduct  render  it  impossible  not  to  believe  that 
an  indispensable  feature  of  that  likeness  wiU  be 
an  unselfish  love  which  transcends  all  other  ethical 
conceptions.  And  even  if  we  discard  altogether 
the  implications  of  evolution,  the  fact  that  many  of 

1  Job  xi.  7. 


INDUCTIVE  THEISM  103 

the  purest  and  most  devoted  benefactors  of  the 
human  race  claim  to  have  had  experimental  evi- 
dence that  there  is  §uch  a  Being  as  has  just  been 
described  affords  ample  ground  for  a  religious  hypo- 
thesis which  is  worthy  of  the  attention  of  scientific 
men.  To  take  it  into  practical  life,  to  subject  it 
over  and  over  again  to  the  test  of  appropriate 
action,  to  examine  it  in  the  light  of  the  various 
canons  of  inductive  reasoning,  to  dwell  in  the  at- 
mosphere of  personal  purity  and  self-sacrifice  which 
is  indispensable  to  successful  rehgious  experiments, 
to  exchange  the  relatively  low  motive  of  scientific 
curiosity  for  that  supreme  ethical  ambition  which 
is  one  of  the  conditions  of  spiritual  discovery,  — 
is  to  perform  the  grandest  induction  that  the 
human  reason  can  make.  It  is  to  carry  the  spirit 
of  scientific  investigation  into  fields  of  research  in 
comparison  with  which  all  others  are  narrow  and 
insignificant.  And  the  command  to  do  so  is  the 
gospel's  message  to  an  age  of  doubt. 

And  he  who  heeds  the  message  will  be  sure  to 
find  a  teleological  meaning  in  life  which  wiU  come 
to  the  rescue  of  the  somewhat  discredited  argimaent 
from  design,  and  go  far  towards  reinstating  it  in 
all  its  former  influence.  We  have  discovered  clear 
proof  of  an  intelligent  purpose  in  an  hitherto  inex- 
plicable machine  when  we  have  learned  that,  what- 
ever else  it  produces,  it  is  capable  of  turning  out 
one  article  of  superior  excellence  and  value.  He 
who  will  pursue  his  religious  investigations  in  the 
manner  already  described  will  not  long  doubt  that 


104    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

he  has  discovered  the  final  cause  of  creation,  the 
end  for  which  the  course  of  nature  and  the  environ- 
ment of  the  individual  life  have  been  established. 
He  will  have  found  the  only  thing  of  adequate 
value  which  human  existence  may  surely  be  made 
to  yield.  Proofs  will  never  cease  to  multiply  that 
the  ultimate  cause  of  all  phenomena  is  not  a  force 
merely,  but  a  character,  and  that  the  influences 
and  agencies  of  this  world  have  been  so  arranged 
that  the  only  thing  they  can  surely  be  made  to 
bring  forth  is  a  similar  character.  The  ambitions 
of  most  men  are  doomed  to  disappointment.  It  is 
antecedently  certain  that  relatively  few  persons  will 
be  able  to  gratify  their  desire  for  wealth,  or  fame, 
or  long  life.  There  are  obstacles  to  supreme  suc- 
cess along  all  of  the  ordinary  lines  of  human  effort 
which  most  men  will  fail  to  surmount.  But  a  spir- 
itual nature,  a  character  founded  on  disinterested 
love,  all  can  acquire.  No  matter  what  the  vicis- 
situdes of  an  individual  career  may  be,  adversity, 
prosperity,  pain,  happiness,  the  crosses,  difficulties, 
and  afflictions  which  thwart  the  hopes  of  men  in 
other  directions  can  aU  be  used  in  rendering  the 
life  gentle  and  kindly,  beneficent  and  unselfish. 
How,  then,  can  we  fail  to  see  a  designing  Hand  in 
that  system  of  natural  laws  and  forces  which,  after 
evolving  its  human  masterpiece  and  developing  in 
it  an  infinite  variety  of  intellectual  and  emotional 
life,  becomes  transformed  into  a  mighty  workshop 
whose  intricate  machinery  cooperates  to  fashion 
every  man  who  so  desires  into  the  likeness  of  God  ? 


CHAPTER  V 

CHRISTIAN    SUPERNATURALISM 

Ever  since  Hume  formulated  his  celebrated  ar- 
gument against  miracles,  it  has  been  increasingly 
difficult  to  secure  from  intelligent  men  a  patient 
consideration  of  the  possibility  that  such  events 
may  have  happened.  Our  experience  of  the  uni- 
formity of  the  course  of  nature  combined  with  our 
experience  of  the  imperfect  reliability  of  hiunan 
testimony,  or,  in  other  words,  the  alleged  fact  that 
supernatural  occurrences  are  less  likely  to  have 
taken  place  than  the  report  of  them  is  to  be  false, 
is  eliminating  them  more  and  more  from  the  cate- 
gory of  causes  by  which  various  historical  and 
religious  phenomena  are  explained.  "  History  ends 
where  miracles  begin,"  says  Strauss.  The  higher 
criticism,  or,  at  least,  some  of  its  ablest  advocates, 
exclude  them  from  the  influences  by  which  the  de- 
velopment of  the  Hebrew  people  has  been  shaped 
and  to  which  Christianity  owes  its  existence.  Nor 
is  it  hard  to  see  that  if  they  are  to  be  uniformly 
set  aside  henceforward  as  mere  products  of  excited 
imaginations  or  as  the  childish  exaggerations  of 
uncritical  observers,  the  prevalent  view  of  the  ori- 
gin and  authority  of  the  Christian  religion  must 
be  profoundly  modified. 


106    THE  RATIONAL   BASIS   OF   ORTHODOXY 

But  John  Stuart  MiU,i  himself  no  behever  in 
the  supernatural,  but  an  author  of  marked  candor, 
who  has  written  for  modern  science  its  logic,  con- 
cedes that  Hume  has  made  out  no  more  than  that 
a  miracle  cannot  be  proved  to  one  who  does  not 
believe  in  the  existence  of  a  being  or  beings  with 
supernatural  powers,  and  with  characters  that  are 
not  inconsistent  with  their  having  performed  mira- 
cles. And  it  was  pointed  out  by  an  acute  philoso- 
pher 2  a  quarter  of  a  century  earlier  that  the  credi- 
bility of  the  miracles  related  in  the  Gospels  was  not 
to  be  settled  by  simply  weighing  against  each  other 
the  testunony  by  which  they  are  supported  and  the 
presumption  in  favor  of  the  uniformity  of  nature, 
but  that  there  might  be  a  priori  considerations 
which  woidd  relieve  the  evangelical  narratives  from 
any  disadvantage  which  might,  in  that  case,  accrue 
to  them.  It  was  his  opinion  that  if  there  is  reason 
to  believe  in  the  existence  of  a  Creator  who  has 
regard  for  the  happiness  of  his  creatures,  and  that 
a  miracle  would  aid  him  in  promoting  their  wel- 
fare, the  evidence  that  he  has  employed  this  in- 
strumentality "is  to  be  examined  j)recisely  like 
the  evidence  for  any  other  extraordinary  event." 
At  that  stage  of  the  discussion  which  has  now  been 
reached  we  are  entitled  to  assume  that  there  is  a 
Being  of  sufficient  power  and  benevolence  to  work 
a  miracle,  and  we  may,  therefore,  rationally  believe 
on  evidence  that  such  a  work  has  been  wrought, 

1  Logic,  p.  440. 

2  Brown,  Cause  and  Effect,  notes  A  and  F. 


CHRISTIAN  SUPERNATURALISM  107 

especially  if  it  can  be  credibly  shown  that  there 
was  a  real  and  imperative  need  of  it. 

What  do  we  mean  by  a  miracle  ?  The  word 
is  sometimes  defined  in  such  a  way  as  to  prejudice 
a  scientific  mind  against  it  at  the  outset.  It  is 
not  a  violation  of  the  laws  of  nature.  It  is  not 
necessarily  even  independent  of  them.  As  one  of 
the  discriminating  writers  ^  last  quoted  has  sug- 
gested, "  There  is  a  general  presumption  against 
any  supposition  of  divine  agency  not  operating 
through  general  laws,"  and  if  a  miracle  is  con- 
ceived merely  as  a  special  divine  interposition,  there 
is  an  antecedent  improbability  against  it  which  can 
be  outweighed  only  by  "an  extraordinary  strength 
of  antecedent  probabilit}^  derived  from  the  special 
circumstances  of  the  case."  Whether  there  is  an 
antecedent  probability  in  favor  of  the  Christian 
miracles  which  is  extraordinary  enough  to  over- 
come any  improbability  which  may  inhere  in  the 
conception  of  a  special  divine  interposition  need 
not  now  be  considered ;  for  a  supernatural  event 
need  not  be  so  defined  as  to  exclude  it  from  the 
sphere  of  natural  law. 

Some  years  ago  an  article  on  the  nebular  hypo- 
thesis appeared  in  the  "  Popular  Science  Monthly." 
The  writer  endeavored  to  convey  some  idea  of  the 
intense  heat  generated  in  the  process  of  planetary 
evolution,  a  heat  which  for  ages  kept  the  earth  in 
a  state  of  liquefaction,  and  in  comparison  with 
which  the  white  heat  of  the  blast  furnace  would  be 
1  Mill,  Logic,  p.  441. 


108    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

relatively  cool.  The  editor  of  the  periodical  seems 
to  have  been  so  impressed  by  the  description  that 
he  appended  a  note  to  the  article,  in  which  he  ex- 
pressed grave  doubts  as  to  the  likelihood  that  life 
would  have  appeared  spontaneously  on  our  globe 
after  such  a  fire-bath.  Bearing  in  mind,  probably, 
that  Tyndall  had  been  able  to  free  permanently 
from  living  germs  more  than  a  hundred  and  fifty 
different  preparations  by  simply  keeping  them  a 
few  minutes  at  the  boiling  point,  he  found  it  well- 
nigh  impossible  to  believe  that,  after  a  region  of 
space  upwards  of  six  billions  of  miles  in  diameter 
had  been  subjected  for  ages  to  a  temperature  more 
than  twice  that  of  the  sun,  life  could  have  appeared 
in  almost  the  very  centre  of  this  vast  sterilized 
sphere  unless  it  had  been  imparted  from  without. 
I  have  only  given  the  general  drift  of  the  editor's 
thought  as  I  remember  it,  and  have  nothing  to 
say  in  regard  to  the  probability  of  the  closing  sug- 
gestion; but  in  making  it  he  recognized  what  I 
conceive  to  be  the  essence  of  the  miracle,  and  of 
supernaturalism  in  general.  I  do  not  imply  that 
he  thought  it  possible  that  life  might  have  been 
brought  into  the  earth  by  anything  like  angehc 
agency,  or  through  the  mediimi  of  a  special  crea- 
tion. No  doubt  he  would  have  contended  that  it 
must  have  made  its  appearance  by  the  action  of 
laws  which  deserved  as  truly  to  be  called  the  laws 
of  nature  as  do  any  of  those  to  which  the  term  is 
commonly  applied ;  but  he  would  probably  have 
said  that  they  were  laws  of  which  he  knew  nothing, 


CHRISTIAN  SUPERNATURALISM  109 

which  were  outside  of  nature  so  far  as  it  had  come 
within  the  scope  of  his  experience,  and  which,  to 
the  best  of  his  belief,  had  in  no  other  case  mani- 
fested themselves  in  the  system  of  forces  and  ener- 
gies with  which  science  has  to  do.  Now  effects 
produced  by  agencies  which  can  be  so  described 
may  properly  be  called  miraculous  in  the  generic 
sense  of  the  term. 

A  miracle,  then,  may  be  broadly  defined  as  an 
event  conforming  to  general  laws  which  operate 
almost  exclusively  outside  the  field  of  one's  normal 
experience.  Its  isolation  from  what  are  called  nat- 
ural occurrences  is  due  to  the  relativity  of  human 
knowledge.  It  could  be  classified  with  them  if  the 
causes  involved  in  its  production  were  better  under- 
stood. The  group  of  effects  to  which  it  belongs  is 
constantly  diminished  as  education  advances.  The 
resident  of  the  tropics  who  could  not  believe  that 
there  was  a  country  in  which  the  inhabitants  could 
walk  on  the  surface  of  a  lake  as  easily  as  on  dry 
ground  was  only  refusing  to  credit  what  would  have 
been  a  miracle  had  it  happened  in  his  own  land ; 
for  such  a  state  of  affairs  could  not  have  been 
brought  about  without  the  introduction  of  a  cli- 
mate of  which  neither  he  nor  his  ancestors  had  had 
any  experience,  and  which  would  have  been  wholly 
foreign  to  the  geographical  locality  in  which  he 
lived. 

A  savage  dwelling  on  the  banks  of  a  river  which 
has  always  flowed  towards  the  east,  if  he  finds  some 
day  its  current  running  in  the  opposite  direction, 


110    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

has  witnessed  what  is,  from  his  point  of  view,  of 
the  nature  of  a  miracle.  To  be  sure,  the  phenome- 
non could  be  explained  by  a  better  educated  man 
as  resulting  from  an  exceptionally  high  tide  or 
from  a  subsidence  of  the  land  ;  but  the  savage,  we 
will  suppose,  knows  nothing  about  the  movements 
of  the  sea  or  about  geological  disturbances.  The 
laws  governing  both  are  wholly  outside  the  realm 
of  his  experience.  A  force  of  which  neither  he  nor 
any  one  whom  he  knows  has  any  comprehension 
whatever  has  directly  reversed  what  he  had  supposed 
to  be  an  unvarying  natural  phenomenon,  and  he 
may  logically  give  to  the  event  the  name  which  cor- 
responds, in  his  native  tongue,  to  that  which  we 
apply,  in  our  language,  to  a  supernatural  occurrence. 
I  do  not  mean,  of  course,  that  the  miracle  is 
commonly  defined  in  such  a  way  as  to  include  in- 
cidents like  those  just  mentioned.  My  contention 
merely  is  that  it  may  and  ought  to  be  so  defined. 
Such  incidents  are  generically  miraculous.  They 
are  invasions  of  one  sphere  of  knowledge  by  facts 
belonging  to  a  higher,  and,  for  the  time  being, 
an  inaccessible  one.  They  are  capable,  it  is  true, 
of  being  classified  with  other  natural  phenomena, 
but  not  by  those  who  were  startled  by  them.  An 
event  may  be  essentially  miraculous  to  a  person  of 
limited  intelligence  and  experience  which  is  wholly 
normal  to  one  of  wider  observation  and  knowledge. 
The  supernatural  is  only  that  which  is  above  nature 
as  we  understand  it,  and  a  miracle  in  the  common 
acceptation   of   the  term  is  that  which  is  above 


CHRISTIAN  SUPERNATURALISM  111 

nature  as  any  mortal  being  yet  understands  it.  It 
is  an  event  whicli  has  foimd  its  way  into  human 
history  out  of  higher  regions  of  causation  than  the 
human  intellect  has  as  yet  been  able  to  explore  and 
comprehend. 

That  there  are  such  regions  we  are  already 
warranted  in  believing.  They  are  presupposed 
by  the  theory  of  evolution.  They  are  the  source 
of  the  intelligence  and  the  energy  by  which  the 
human  race  is  being  moulded  into  a  constantly 
improving  type  of  being.  They  are  the  realm  of 
mysterious  origins  whose  secrets  baffle  the  prying 
gaze  of  human  curiosity.  They  are  the  reservoir 
from  which  flows  the  inscrutable  current  of  causes 
which  is  shaping  the  material  and  moral  universe. 
They  are  the  undiscovered  country  on  the  other 
side  of  that  "  brazen  wall  "  beyond  which  human 
investigations  cannot  be  pushed.  Presumably  this 
unknown  realm  has  its  laws,  and  a  resulting  class 
of  phenomena  which  a  mind  sufficiently  enhght- 
ened  would  properly  term  natural.  There  can  be 
no  objection  to  supposing  that  these  laws  are  not 
inconsistent  with  those  pertaining  to  our  own  nar- 
row sphere  of  observation,  and  that  there  can  be 
no  collision  between  the  two  classes  other  than  of 
the  kind  that  occurs  over  and  over  again  between 
forces  with  which  we  are  familiar  and  others  by 
which  they  are  sometimes  counteracted.  That 
one  of  these  higher  laws  should,  under  special  cir- 
cumstances, produce  effects  in  the  lower  sphere  to 
which  our  knowledge  is,  for  the  present,  confined,  — 


112    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

that  a  being  should  arise  on  the  earth  so  exception- 
ally endowed  as  to  be  able  to  wield,  for  a  sublime 
purpose,  some  of  the  powers  pertaining  to  this 
higher  realm  of  fact,  —  is  not  essentially  incredible. 
It  would  conform  to  the  analogy  of  the  examples 
already  given.  The  resulting  effect  would  differ 
from  them  only  in  the  fact  that  instead  of  tran- 
scending the  experience  merely  of  a  tribe,  an  indi- 
vidual, or  a  body  of  trained  scientific  observers,  it 
would  be  beyond  all  save  the  rarest  experience  of 
the  whole  human  race.  Such  an  event  is  a  miracle 
in  the  usual  sense  of  the  term. 

The  uniformity  of  the  course  of  nature,  as  that 
phrase  is  commonly  understood  in  discussions  of 
this  subject,  has  not  been  established  so  firmly  as 
to  rule  out  the  possibility  that  such  occurrences 
may  have  taken  place.  It  does  not  rest  on  a  per- 
fectly conclusive  induction.  The  strongest  form, 
perhaps,  in  which  the  argument  for  it  can  be 
stated  is  that  every  effect  which  has  been  investi- 
gated by  competent  observers  in  modern  times  can 
be  explained  as  resulting  from  what  are  commonly 
known  as  natural  causes ;  therefore  natural  causa- 
tion, in  the  ordinary  meaning  of  the  term,  must  be 
presumed  to  account  for  all  phenomena  whatever. 

But  it  is  certainly  conceivable  that  although  the 
facts  bearing  on  this  question  may  for  a  long  time 
all  point  to  a  single  conclusion,  there  may  be  others 
lurking  in  the  background,  as  it  were,  which  when 
discovered  wiU  necessitate  a  different  inference. 
A  machine  was  once  invented  for  registering  num- 


CHRISTIAN  SUPERNATURALISM  113 

bers.  It  would  produce  them  in  regular  succession 
without  a  break  from  1  to  10,000,000.  Only  an 
exceptional  mind  would  doubt  that  if  the  notation 
should  continue  beyond  that  limit  the  next  number 
registered  would  be  10,000,001.  The  previous 
induction  would  have  seemed  to  most  persons  to 
render  such  an  inference  practically  certain.  There 
would  be  no  more  ground  for  withholding  it  than 
an  Indian  on  the  sea-coast,  whose  knowledge  of  the 
movements  of  the  ocean  conjoined  with  that  of  his 
tribe  covers  a  space  of  more  than  13,500  years, 
would  have  for  not  being  absolutely  sure  that  the 
tide  would  rise  the  following  day.  And  yet  the 
next  number  exliibited  would  be  10,000,002. 
The  machine  would  then  register  several  millions 
of  numbers  without  a  single  interruption  of  the 
series,  until  the  conclusion  would  seem  to  be  estab- 
lished that  no  other  would  occur,  and  then  there 
would  be  a  second  break.  The  inventor  was  aware 
of  this  peculiarity  of  his  machine.  It  was  insep- 
arable from  the  mechanism.  He  furnished  a  list  of 
the  numbers  that  would  be  omitted  in  a  series  run- 
ning as  high,  I  think,  as  50,000,000.  In  other 
words,  the  exceptions  were  as  truly  the  result  of 
law  as  was  the  rule,  but  they  were  due  to  a  law 
that  very  seldom  manifested  itself.  To  all  save 
the  man  who  understood  the  mechanical  cause  that 
was  behind  them  they  were  essentially  miracles  on 
a  small  scale. 

Now  there  is  nothing  in  the   sequence  of  phe- 
nomena on  which  the  belief  in  the  uniformity  of 


114    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

nature  rests  that  renders  irrational  the  suggestion 
that  unique  and  exceptional  events  have  taken 
place  as  the  result  of  causes  which  operate  but 
rarely.  It  would  be  idle  to  contend  that  we  are 
in  possession  of  so  many  facts  pertaining  to  nature 
at  every  epoch  of  time  and  at  every  stage  of  its 
development  as  to  have  the  right  to  deny  that 
there  may  have  been  "  psychological  moments " 
in  which  higher  than  the  ordinary  laws  of  nature 
came  into  operation.  The  evolutionist  cannot  re- 
late the  story  of  organic  and  mental  development 
without  virtually  asking  his  hearers  to  suspend 
judgment  at  various  points  where  miraculous  in- 
terpositions might  be  suspected.  As  previously 
intimated,  he  leaves  the  origin  of  life  unexplained. 
He  does  not  pretend  to  account  for  the  dawn  of 
human  consciousness.  The  passage  from  inorganic 
to  organic,  from  merely  organic  or  vegetable  to  the 
fully  developed  animal  condition,  from  sentiency 
to  rationality,  are  cited  by  Mivart^  as  unexplained 
breaks  in  the  chain  of  evolutionary  sequences. 
The  Darwinian  theory  is  not  yet  able  to  make  it 
seem  utterly  improbable  that  a  new  force  must 
have  been  exerted  to  bridge  over  these  gaps  in  the 
line  of  human  descent.  How  far,  then,  is  any  one 
from  being  in  a  position  to  deny  with  any  show  of 
reason  that  nature's  mechanism  has  been  so  ar- 
ranged as  to  skip  a  regular  number  now  and  then 
and  make  a  longer  stride  forward  !  How  little  is 
any  one  prepared  to  affirm  that  when  the  human 

1  Essays  and  Criticisms. 


CHRISTIAN   SUPERNATURALISM  115 

race  was  to  enter  upon  a  new  phase  of  spiritual 
growth  it  did  not  receive,  by  some  unusual  process, 
a  fresh  impartation  of  power  !  It  is  evident  from 
what  has  been  already  said  in  regard  to  the  miss- 
ing links  in  the  chain  of  natural  causation  that  the 
macliine  is  not  yet  fully  understood.  The  grasp 
which  science  has  thus  far  obtained  upon  the  de- 
tails of  its  construction  is  too  little  comprehensive 
to  warrant  any  dogmatic  assertion  of  the  essential 
incredibility  of  miracles  as  already  defined. 

It  need  not  be  supposed,  however,  that  the  ex- 
ceptional events  which  have  thus  been  suggested 
must  be  as  mechanical  in  their  origin  as  the  illus- 
tration just  employed  might  seem  to  imply.  The 
laws  of  nature  may  be  nothing  more  than  regular 
and  self-consistent  modes  of  divine  action.  The 
uniformity  ascribed  to  them  may  be  due  merely  to 
an  adherence,  on  the  part  of  God,  to  a  chosen  plan 
of  evolution.  But  no  difficulty  will  be  created  if 
natural  law  be  conceived  as  analogous  to  a  system 
of  machinery  through  which  God  carries  on  his 
operations.  To  quote  again  from  the  author  ^  to 
whom  I  have  already  referred  so  often  on  account 
of  his  general  fairness,  if  by  a  miracle  "  it  be  only 
meant  that  the  divine  being,  in  the  exercise  of  his 
power  of  interfering  with  and  suspending  his  own 
laws,  guides  himself  by  some  general  principle  or 
rule  of  action,  this  of  course  cannot  be  disproved, 
and  is  in  itself  a  most  probable  supposition."  In 
other  words,  it  is  not  necessary  to  refer  supposed 
1  Mill,  Three  Essays  on  Beligion. 


116    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF   ORTHODOXY 

divine  interpositions  in  the  course  of  nature  to 
Mgher  laws  of  so  rigid  and  meclianical  a  character 
as  is  often  ascribed  to  natural  law,  but  only  to  a 
superior  Will  which  always  acts  in  harmony  with 
itself,  and  which  has  at  its  conmiand  powers  that 
are  not  regularly  exhibited  in  action  on  the  rela- 
tively low  plane  of  our  present  environment. 

But  even  when  supernatural  occurrences  are 
thus  conceived,  —  even  if  miracles  be  regarded  as 
coordinate,  in  all  essential  particulars,  with  events 
that  are  called  natural,  —  it  must  be  conceded  that 
there  is  a  very  strong  presumption  against  them 
which  must  be  neutrahzed  by  equally  powerful 
considerations  if  the  evidence  in  their  behalf,  how- 
ever cogent  it  may  be,  is  not  to  be  overborne. 

"  Nee  dens  intersit  nisi  dignus  vindice  nodus 
Incident," 

says  the  Eoman  poet ;  and  the  rule  which  he 
apphes  to  the  drama  holds  true,  no  doubt,  in  our 
interpretation  of  the  development  of  nature.  Ad- 
ditional divine  agency  must  not  be  assumed  unless 
a  knot  occurs  which  can  be  loosened  only  by  a  new 
display  of  divine  power.  A  much  stronger  degree 
of  evidence  would  be  needed  to  justify  belief  in 
miracles  if  they  appeared  to  be  superfluous  than 
would  be  required  if  it  were  shown  that  they  could 
not  have  been  omitted  without  prejudice  to  the 
interests  of  humanity.  In  the  latter  event  there 
would  be  a  veritable  knot  in  the  process  of  human 
development  which  would  prepare  us  for  a  glimpse 
of  the  divine  fingers. 


CHRISTIAN  SUPERNATURALISM  117 

Several  such  knots  might  be  mentioned,  some 
of  which  wiU  be  described  in  other  connections  ; 
but  from  one  point  of  view,  three  of  them  might 
be  regarded  as  component  parts  of  the  one  first  to 
be  named,  which  is  the  need  that  there  was  of  a 
new  moral  force  in  the  world  at  the  beginning  of 
the  Christian  era. 

One  has  only  to  put  to  himseK  the  question 
whether  Christianity  could  have  been  spared  at 
that  time  and  subsequently  as  a  factor  in  human 
development  if  he  would  obtain  some  idea  of  the 
deadlock  which  existed  in  the  affairs  of  mankind. 
The  old  civiHzation  was  on  the  verge  of  ruin. 
Already  the  northern  barbarians  were  giving  om- 
inous intimations  of  the  doom  that  was  slowly  but 
surely  moving  down  upon  the  Roman  empire. 
The  old  religions  had  lost  their  hold  on  the  most 
cultivated  human  minds.  The  pagan  cults  were 
scoffed  at  openly  or  in  private  by  most  intelligent 
men.  Even  Judaism  had  almost  disappeared 
under  the  drifts  of  rabbinical  perversion.  The 
morals  of  the  world  were  hideous.  The  gladiato- 
rial games  with  which  it  amused  itself  suggested  a 
widespread  moral  insanity.  Tacitus  despaired  of 
the  future,  and  thought  that  the  Roman  empire 
was  under  a  curse.  What  hope  was  there  that  the 
normal  moral  forces  then  existing  in  the  earth 
would  be  able  to  bring  the  human  race  in  safety 
through  the  gathering  storm  ?  What  prospect  was 
there  that  when  the  northern  deluge  should  bury 
the  civilization  of  the  age  under  its  oft-recurring 


118    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

waves   there  would   be   buoyancy  enough  in  the 
straining  bark  to  right  it  in  the  end  ? 

It  is  hard  to  write  hypothetical  history,  to  ex- 
plain what  would  have  been  the  course  of  human 
affairs  if  some  important  event  had  not  happened, 
but  is  there  any  one  who  would  seriously  main- 
tain that  if  the  gospel  had  not  been  preached  the 
human  race  would  have  reached  its  present  moral 
altitude?  We  know  that  when  Kome  feU,  the 
rude  invaders  found  a  religion  awaiting  them  which 
they  were  fain  to  embrace.  We  can  trace  the 
influence  of  the  Christian  faith  during  the  follow- 
ing centuries  as  it  broadens  out  like  a  band  of 
moonlight  on  troubled  seas.  We  can  see  it  assum- 
ing such  outward  forms  and  expression  as  render 
it  always  the  dominant  moral  force  of  its  time. 
We  behold  it  steadily  founding  its  numberless 
charitable  and  humanitarian  institutions,  compel- 
ling lawless  minds  to  associate  the  idea  of  divine 
protection  with  human  poverty  and  weakness,  en- 
forcing the  moral  law  by  its  tremendous  punitive 
sanctions  ;  and  the  question  what  the  world  could 
have  done  without  it  must  appear  incapable  of  a 
hopeful  answer. 

That  such  a  religion  must  have  produced  a  vast 
ethical  and  altruistic  influence  on  the  human  race 
could  be  safely  deduced  from  certain  antecedent 
considerations.  It  will  not  be  doubted  that  a 
man's  beliefs  react  upon  his  conduct,  and  that  his 
convictions  are  likely  to  shape  in  some  measure  his 
life.     It  wiU  probably  be  easily  admitted  that  the 


CHRISTIAN  SUPERNATURALISM  119 

larger  his  conception  of  his  essential  dignity  and 
of  his  spiritual  outlook  becomes,  the  more  amena- 
ble he  is  likely  to  be  to  motives  that  tend  to 
weaken  the  hold  of  his  lower  nature  upon  him. 
That  a  man  who  has  a  concrete  proof  of  immortal- 
ity which  illustrates  at  the  same  time  the  ultimate 
triumph  of  an  unselfish  life,  who  is  convinced  that 
a  sacrifice  has  been  wrought  by  which  his  sins  have 
been  taken  out  of  his  way  to  happiness  and  that 
he  has  received  an  assurance  of  eventual  moral 
success,  is  immeasurably  more  likely  to  respond  to 
appeals  for  self-denial  and  resistance  to  his  lower 
instincts  than  one  who  is  without  such  incentives 
to  high  ethical  conduct,  would  hardly  seem  to  be 
debatable.  Kidd  ^  is  undoubtedly  right  m  teaching 
that  there  is  no  rational  sanction  for  the  conditions 
of  human  progress ;  that  without  the  promises  of 
religion  there  is  no  encouragement  to  unselfish  liv- 
ing that  would  have  any  weight  with  the  great  bulk 
of  humanity.  The  highest  ideals  of  conduct  are 
superhuman  if  man  is  only  the  head  of  the  brute 
creation.  They  become  intelligible  and  practical, 
they  become  sources  of  an  intense  moral  stimidus, 
if  they  represent  the  possible  final  attainments  of 
an  immortal  being.  Those  beliefs  which  have  done 
so  much  to  free  the  highest  ethical  ideals  from 
the  suspicion  of  being  visionary  and  unreal,  and 
to  make  them  seem  to  many  within  range  of  a  ra- 
tional moral  ambition,  were  furnished  to  mankind 
by  the   religion  of  Christ.      And   these   beliefs, 

1  Social  Evolution,  chap.  iii. 


120    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

which  have  given  so  strong  an  impetus  to  unself- 
ish living,  have  been  built  on  the  foundation  of  a 
supposed  miracle. 

It  was  the  story  of  the  resurrection  of  Christ 
that  saved  ethical  Christianity  to  the  world.  Paul,i 
in  an  epistle  whose  genuineness  has  never  been 
seriously  disputed,  emphatically  declares  that  with- 
out it  his  preaching  would  be  of  no  value.  What- 
ever may  be  our  opinion  at  this  stage  of  the  discus- 
sion as  to  the  credibility  of  that  event,  it  would  seem 
impossible  to  deny  that  had  Paul  not  believed  it 
he  would  not  have  preached,  and  that  his  influence 
woidd  have  to  be  left  out  of  any  calculations  we 
might  make  as  to  what  Christianity  would  have 
effected  in  the  world  in  the  way  of  ethical  improve- 
mento  And  that  such  a  subtraction  would  be  a 
serious  one  we  shall  easily  believe  when  we  remem- 
ber that  it  was  the  great  apostle  to  the  Gentiles 
who  was  chiefly  instrumental  in  bursting  the  shell 
of  Jewish  exclusiveness  and  broadening  the  new 
faith,  as  it  was  held  by  its  first  adherents,  to  the 
dimensions  of  a  universal  religion. 

The  earliest  sermon  of  which  we  have  any  re- 
cord subsequently  to  the  death  of  Jesus  virtually 
grounds  the  gospel  on  the  affirmation  that  he  rose 
from  the  dead.  In  nearly  every  book  which  has 
come  down  to  us  from  the  age  of  the  apostles  the 
resurrection  is  mentioned.  In  the  only  work  extant 
which  professes  to  be  a  contemporary  history  of  the 
infant  church,  the  same  event  is  made  prominent  in 

1  1  Cor.  XV.  13. 


CHRISTIAN  SUPERNATURALISM  121 

almost  every  public  address  ascribed  to  the  first 
evangelists.  Indeed,  it  may  well  be  questioned 
whether  the  movement  started  by  Christ  was  pri- 
marily an  ethical  one.  It  seems  rather  to  have 
been  of  the  nature  of  a  philosophical  or  eschato- 
logical  reform,  a  vast  and  beneficent  change  in 
man's  conception  of  death  and  of  his  outlook  be- 
yond the  grave.  The  matchless  character  of  Jesus, 
even  after  it  had  been  emphasized  and  illumined  by 
his  crucifixion,  would  not  of  itself  have  been  suffi- 
cient to  win  to  the  new  faith  that  immense  num- 
ber of  adherents  which  rendered  it  a  cosmopolitan 
cult  in  two  centuries  and  a  half.  Strauss^  con- 
cedes that  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  was  "  the  un- 
conditional antecedent  without  which  Christianity 
could  have  had  no  existence." 

If  we  feel  constrained  to  admit  to-day  that 
had  it  not  been  for  a  general  behef  that  Christ 
had  risen  from  the  dead,  his  religion  would  have 
secured  but  a  feeble  foothold  in  the  earth  or 
none  at  all,  we  recognize  the  existence  of  the  knot 
in  human  development  of  which  I  have  already 
spoken.  We  acknowledge  it  to  have  been  ante- 
cedently necessary  that  something  should  occur  to 
convince  large  portions  of  the  human  race  that  a 
certain  man  had  died  and  risen  again,  which  is 
equivalent  to  saying  that  such  a  miracle,  if  it  should 
take  place,  would  be  of  indispensable  moral  utility 
to  mankind.  We  are  thus  reduced  to  the  neces- 
sity of  inferring  that  God  could  best  promote  the 

1  Orthodoxy :  its  Truths  and  Errors,  p.  80. 


122    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

ethical  evolution  of  man  only  by  a  resurrection,  or 
by  so  ordering  events  that  one  would  be  generally 
believed  to  have  taken  place.  Which  of  these  al- 
ternatives is  the  more  consistent  with  the  character 
we  have  learned  to  ascribe  to  the  Most  High  need 
not  be  asked.  The  reply  which  is  made  by  the 
evolutionist  to  some  of  the  objections  of  the  theist, 
namely,  that  it  is  incredible  that  God  would  set 
such  a  trap  for  the  human  reason  as  the  proofs 
of  evolution  would  constitute  if  that  theory  is  not 
true,  would  seem  to  be  applicable  here  also.  If 
Christ  did  not  rise  from  the  dead,  then  the  evidence 
that  he  did  so  has  been  a  veritable  snare  to  the 
Christian  Church  for  more  than  eighteen  hundred 
years,  a  snare  from  which  only  a  very  few  of  its 
members  have  escaped.  That  a  Being  who  needs 
for  an  ethical  purpose  a  general  belief  that  such  a 
miracle  has  taken  place  would  create  such  a  belief 
by  misleading  the  human  reason  rather  than  by 
performing  the  miracle,  is  a  proposition  which  no 
theist  will  readily  entertain. 

If,  then,  the  ethical  needs  of  the  human  race 
which  have  just  been  considered,  and  which  wiU 
appear  even  more  urgent  in  later  chapters,  suggest 
the  existence  of  something  like  a  deadlock  in  the 
moral  development  of  the  human  race  which  could 
be  broken  by  no  normal  act  of  Providence  that 
can  be  imagined,  it  would  seem  that  there  was  a 
probability  which  might  well  be  called  extraor- 
dinary that  an  abnormal  divine  act  would  be  per- 
formed.    And  if,  as  Mill  implies,  the  antecedent 


CHRISTIAN  SUPERNATURALISM  123 

improbability  against  a  miracle,  even  when  con- 
ceived as  a  special  divine  interposition,  would  be 
out  weighed  by  "  an  extraordinary  strength  of  prob- 
ability derived  from  the  special  circumstances  of 
the  case,"  it  would  seem  that  the  improbability 
would  be  even  more  signally  outweighed  when  the 
miracle  is  not  so  conceived,  but  is  regarded  only 
as  a  result  of  natural  laws  which  transcend  the 
bounds  of  all  save  the  most  exceptional  human 
experience. 

I  have  thus  endeavored  to  show  that  a  miracle 
is  not  necessarily  an  event  which  is  outside  the 
realm  of  natural  law,  that  it  may  be  due  to  causes 
which  are  normal  to  spheres  beyond  our  present 
experience,  that  there  is  not  only,  at  the  point 
which  we  have  reached,  no  presumption  against  it, 
but  even  some  degree  of  probability  the  other  way 
arising  out  of  the  ethical  necessities  of  the  case. 
It  would  seem,  then,  according  to  the  opinions  of 
the  authors  already  quoted,  that  it  is  something 
which  evidence  is  competent  to  establish  ;  and  we 
have  only  now  to  inquire  how  much  evidence  there 
is  in  favor  of  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  the  cru- 
cial miracle,  which  I  have  selected  because  with  it 
every  other  must  stand  or  fall. 

One  of  the  strongest  proofs  that  it  actually  oc- 
curred is  found  in  the  fact  that  it  cannot  be  denied 
without  creating  a  permanent  gap  in  the  chain  of 
historic  cause  and  effect.  It  is  like  a  stone  in  a 
solid  wall,  and  is  held  in  place  by  the  firm  masonry 
of  later  events.     Every  attempt  to  explain  it  on 


124    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

naturalistic  grounds  has  failed.  The  theory  of 
fraud  is  not  now  entertained.  Competent  crit- 
ics no  longer  believe  that  the  alleged  death  of 
Jesus  was  only  a  swoon.  The  hypothesis  that 
the  disciples  were  deluded  by  visions  was  born  of 
desperation,  and  it  very  strongly  corroborates  the 
gospel  narratives  by  showing  to  what  unnatural 
devices  those  who  dispute  them  must  resort.  It 
has  assumed  no  form  on  which  the  rationalists 
could  unite  with  anything  approaching  unanimity, 
no  form  which  is  not  clearly  irreconcilable  with 
the  accounts  which  they  seek  to  explain.  The 
original  behef  in  the  resurrection  is  a  phenomenon 
without  an  adequate  explanation  apart  from  that 
of  the  New  Testament.  They  who  reject  this  ex- 
planation cannot  account  for  the  most  important 
movement  in  the  annals  of  the  human  race.  Be- 
tween the  crucifixion  and  the  day  of  Pentecost 
next  ensuing,  as  is  generally  admitted,  something 
happened  which  changed  the  disciples  from  timid, 
cowering  fugitives  into  men  of  aggressive  force, 
whom  no  danger  could  daunt  and  no  civil  or  eccle- 
siastical authority  overawe.  Out  of  that  change 
has  grown  the  mighty  Christian  Church  of  to-day 
and  all  the  measureless  influence  it  is  exerting; 
yet  rationahsm  has  practically  given  up  the  solu- 
tion of  the  question,  "  What  occurred  ?  " 

Baur  says,^  "  For  the  disciples  the  resurrection 
had  all  the  reality  of  an  historical  fact,"  and  that 
is  all  we  need  to  know.     It  is  "  not  so  much  the 

1  Boston  Lectures,  1871,  p.  376. 


CHRISTIAN  SUPERNATURALISM  125 

fact  of  the  resurrection  as  the  belief  in  it  "  which 
explains  the  history ;  "  the  real  character  of  the 
resurrection  lies  outside  the  sphere  of  historical 
inquiry."  But  the  issue  cannot  be  thus  evaded. 
The  question  may  properly  be  asked,  What  right 
has  any  man  to  dislocate  history,  to  mutilate  our 
records,  without  repairing  the  damage?  The  best 
evidence  we  have  that  any  remote  event  took  place 
is  in  the  fact  that  it  renders  later  events  explicable. 
"We  must  not  wantonly  discredit  it  if,  by  so  doing, 
we  destroy  the  historical  explanation  of  subsequent 
undoubted  occurrences.  A  self-consistent  account 
of  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  movement  has 
come  down  to  us.  It  declares  that  Jesus  rose 
from  the  dead,  and  by  so  doing  wrought  the  vast 
transformation  in  the  character  of  the  disciples 
which  all  concede  must  have  taken  place.  The 
fact  thus  asserted  explains  perfectly  the  events 
which  followed.  It  is  a  cause  psychologically  ade- 
quate to  account  for  them.  No  break  appears  in 
the  development  of  Christianity  from  the  days  of 
John  the  Baptist  to  the  present  time.  The  history 
of  the  greatest  reformation  the  world  has  ever  seen 
can  be  followed  step  by  step  from  the  very  begin- 
ning, and  is  always  intelligible  and  self -consistent. 
But  suddenly  the  bridge  which  connects  ancient 
and  modern  history  is  broken  down.  We  are  as- 
sured that  the  event  which  had  rendered  them  a 
continuous  whole  did  not  take  place.  A  cause  is 
removed  from  an  hitherto  unbroken  series  of  his- 
torical sequences,  and  aU  attempts  to  close  up  the 


126    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

gap  fail.  When  Aladdin's  palace  was  built,  one 
jeweled  window  was  left  unfinished  until  it  was 
demonstrated  that  there  were  not  gems  enough  in 
the  empire  to  complete  it.  The  narrative  of  the 
beginnings  of  Christianity,  however,  is  a  structure 
which  has  been  handed  down  to  us  causally  perfect, 
and  the  rationalist,  after  dashing  the  jewels  out  of 
its  largest  casement,  neither  permits  them  to  be 
restored  nor  finds  anything  to  take  their  place. 

The  true  historian  is  interested  not  only  in 
the  political  or  social  events  of  the  past,  but  also 
in  the  causal  relation  which  subsists  among  them. 
He  is  not  a  mere  annalist;  he  is  a  philosopher. 
It  is  his  mission  not  only  to  chronicle  palpable 
facts,  but  also  to  give  an  intelligent  explanation  of 
the  movements  of  thought  which  create  such  facts. 
The  student  of  ecclesiastical  history  has  a  right  to 
demand  an  answer  to  the  question  how  the  earliest 
Christians  came  to  believe  that  Jesus  rose  from  the 
dead.  If  he  is  not  to  be  permitted  to  credit  the  caus- 
ally sufficient  statement  that  the  event  believed  had 
actually  taken  place,  he  is  entitled  to  claim  a  sub- 
stitute for  that  statement  in  the  shape  of  some- 
thing that  is  psychologically  reasonable,  something 
that  can  be  properly  classified  with  recognized  his- 
torical forces.  He  cannot  be  expected  to  pay  such 
deference  to  mere  theories  or  whims  as  to  admit 
that  a  great  gulf  has  become  fixed  in  human  history 
beyond  which  the  most  momentous  and  beneficent 
effects  which  have  ever  accrued  to  the  human  race 
cannot  be  traced  upward  to  their  cause. 


CHRISTIAN  SUPERNATURALISM  127 

We  are  now  prepared  to  consider  the  direct 
historical  evidence  by  which  the  belief  in  the  re- 
surrection of  Christ  is  supported.  Of  course,  it 
would  be  impracticable  for  me  to  give  any  satis- 
factory review  of  it  in  the  limited  space  which  I  can 
allot  to  this  branch  of  my  subject ;  but  it  may  be 
safely  affirmed  that  the  evidence  is  stronger  to-day 
than  it  has  been  at  any  time  since  the  Christian 
records  have  been  subjected  to  critical  examination. 
Lessing,  the  celebrated  German  author,  who  died 
in  1781,  although  he  did  not  accept  Christianity 
as  a  religion,  declared,  nevertheless,  that  the  resur- 
rection of  Christ  was  an  event  against  which  he 
would  raise  historically  no  objections.^  This  will 
serve  to  show  what  impression  was  made  by  the 
evidence  in  its  favor  upon  the  unbiased  judgment 
of  a  capable  scholar  before  the  theories  of  Strauss 
and  Baur  had  started  the  discussions  which  have 
made  the  last  sixty  or  seventy  years  among  the 
most  remarkable  in  the  history  of  Christian  apol- 
ogetics. During  that  time  the  Tiibingen  school 
and  the  advocates  of  the  mythical  theory  have 
been  hurling  heav}^  shot  against  the  genuineness 
and  authenticity  of  the  gospel  narratives.  It  was 
affirmed  with  much  plausibility  and  force  by  men 
of  ingenious  minds  and  broad  scholarship  that 
the  Gospels  were  written  much  too  late  to  reflect 
the  prevalent  opinions  of  Christ's  time,  and  that 
they  had  gathered  in  the  interim  large  accretions 
of  unhistorical  matter.     But   the  dates  assigned 

1  Boston  Lectures,  1870,  p.  292. 


128    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

by  these  critics  to  the  evangelical  narratives  have 
since  been  abandoned.  It  is  now  pretty  generally 
agreed  that  the  Synoptic  Gospels  were  written  in 
the  first  century,  and  that  the  Fourth  appeared 
not  later  than  the  first  decade  of  the  second  cen- 
tury is  the  view  of  the  most  competent  living 
authority.  The  magnitude  of  the  victory  which 
conservative  scholarship  has  won  along  this  line 
may  be  best  understood  by  comparing  the  dates 
assigned  to  the  Gospels  by  Baur  and  those  now 
adopted  by  Harnack,^  the  eminent  ecclesiastical 
historian. 

Baur.  Harnack. 

Matthew,  A.  d.  130.  Soon  after  A.  d.  70. 

Mark,  A.  d.  160.  A.  n.  65  to  A.  d.  70. 

Luke,  A.  D.  150.  Not  later    than     A.  D.    90, 

probably  earlier. 
John,  A.  D.  165.  Between  A.  n.  80  and  A.  d. 

110. 

In  other  words,  all  four  were  in  existence  at  a 
time  when  multitudes  of  persons  were  living  who 
must  have  known  whether  the  events  related  in 
them  were  true  or  not.  Whatever  weight  of  evi- 
dence was  tacitly  recognized  as  inhering  in  a  con- 
temporary document  by  the  laborious  efforts  which 
the  critics  made  to  assign  to  the  Gospels  a  late 
date  must  be  accorded  to  them  now  that  these 
efforts  have  miscarried ;  so  that  the  sacred  narra- 
tives occupy  a  stronger  position  than  ever  in  conse- 

1  "  Harnaek's  Chronology  of  the  New  Testament,"  The  New 
World,  September,  1897. 


CHRISTIAN  SUPERNATURALISM  129 

quence  of  the  fiery  ordeal  through  which  they  have 
so  triumphantly  passed. 

The  genuineness  of  the  first  four  Epistles  has 
never  been  seriously  questioned,  and  is  not  denied 
at  the  present  time.  In  one  of  these,  written  about 
twenty-four  years  after  the  crucifixion,  —  as  near 
to  that  event  as  we  are  (a.  d.  1900)  to  the  dis- 
puted presidential  election  of  1876,  —  Paul  men- 
tions witnesses  of  the  resurrection  to  the  number 
of  over  five  hundred,  most  of  whom,  he  claimed, 
were  still  living.  Among  them  were  Peter  and 
the  other  disciples ;  and  as  it  appears  from  one 
of  these  same  letters  ^  that  he  had  previously  asso- 
ciated for  a  considerable  interval  of  time  with 
John,  Peter,  and  James,  the  Lord's  brother,  he 
must  have  known  whether  the  reported  appear- 
ances of  the  risen  Christ  to  them  were,  in  their 
estimation,  real.  That  he  would  question  them 
with  the  deepest  interest  in  regard  to  an  occur- 
rence which  he  made  the  central  fact  of  his  preach- 
ing it  would  be  superfluous  to  affirm.  Not  only, 
therefore,  does  he  declare  that  Jesus  appeared 
after  the  crucifixion  to  himself  personally,  he  gives 
us  also,  in  a  document  written  as  near  to  the  event 
as  we  are  to  the  closing  year  of  President  Grant's 
administration,  what  we  cannot  doubt  has  all  the 
force  of  direct  testimony  to  the  truth  of  the  resur- 
rection from  the  lips  of  the  chief  disciples. 

It  is  not,  indeed,  established  as  yet  by  criticism 
beyond  question  that  all  of  the  Gospels  were  writ- 
1  Gal.  i.  18, 19 ;  ii.  1. 


130    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

ten  by  the  persons  whose  names  they  bear.  Har- 
nack,  for  example,  does  not  ascribe  the  Fourth 
Gospel  to  John.  But  even  if  it  should  be  admitted 
that  there  might  still  be  some  doubt  as  to  author- 
ship, any  diminution  in  the  value  of  the  four  docu- 
ments as  testimony  which  might  result  would  not 
be  serious.  It  is  not,  as  a  rule,  the  author  who 
renders  an  historical  work  credible ;  it  is  rather 
the  work  which  first  establishes  his  reputation  for 
credibility.  The  histories  of  Tacitus  carry  with 
them  great  weight,  and  to  cite  him  as  an  author- 
ity for  an  historical  statement  is  to  render  it  at 
least  worthy  of  attention.  Suppose  it  to  be  dis- 
covered, however,  that  these  histories  have  been 
erroneously  ascribed  to  him,  and  that  they  were 
actually  written  by  an  obscure  individual  whose 
name,  let  us  say,  was  Sonorus.  What  would  be 
the  consequence?  The  books  would  part  with 
no  atom  of  their  trustworthiness.  Citations  from 
them  would  not  be  expunged  from  the  work  of  a 
single  living  historian.  It  was  the  histories  that 
won  human  confidence,  not  the  name  under  which 
they  were  given  to  the  world ;  and  if  such  a  dis- 
covery as  I  have  suggested  should  be  made,  all  the 
authority  which  had  previously  attached  to  the 
name  of  Tacitus  would  be  transferred  to  that  of 
Sonorus,  and  the  former  would  be  buried  in  obhv- 
ion. 

We  have  the  same  reason  for  believing  that  the 
four  Gospels  were  written  by  the  persons  whose 
names  they  bear  that  we  have  for  holding  a  sim- 


CHRISTIAN  SUPERNATURALISM  131 

ilar  belief  in  regard  to  most  ancient  documents ; 
but  it  is  very  evident  that  the  Second  and  Third 
derive  no  special  weight  from  the  names  attached 
to  them.  On  the  contrary,  they  have  rescued 
these  names  from  obscurity,  and  have  made  them 
as  famous  as  any  that  are  known  in  literature.  If 
we  credit  these  two  narratives,  it  is  not  because 
they  were  composed  by  Mark  and  Luke.  The 
value  of  the  latter  of  the  two  consists  largely  in 
the  fact  that  it  bears  internal  evidence  of  being 
the  work  of  a  competent  historical  investigator. 
The  other  may  derive  some  slight  importance 
from  the  ancient  tradition  that  it  represents  the 
teaching  of  Peter ;  but  its  strongest  credentials  — 
and  the  same  may  be  said  of  each  of  the  other 
accounts  —  are  found  in  the  twofold  fact  that  it 
describes  a  character  which  the  author  was  not 
competent  to  invent,  and  that  it  was  received  as 
authentic  by  the  church  from  the  earliest  times. 

Nor  if  the  First  and  Fourth  Gospels  could  be 
proved  not  to  have  been  written  by  disciples  of 
Jesus,  would  the  credibility  of  what  they  assert  as 
to  the  resurrection  of  Christ  be  destroyed.  For 
it  is  now  settled  that  the  First  was  compiled  when 
most  of  the  disciples  were  still  living,  and  it  cer- 
tainly could  not  have  won  from  the  churches  the 
general  and  early  acceptance  which  we  know  it 
found,  if  it  had  not  been  in  harmony  with  the  facts 
that  were  known  to  the  earliest  Christians.  And 
the  Fourth  Gospel  was  in  circulation  when  hundreds 
of  the  disciples  of  John  must  have  been  living, 


132    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

who  would  not  only  have  eagerly  read  a  book  which 
had  appeared  under  their  master's  name,  but  would 
have  promptly  branded  it  as  an  imposture  had  it 
not  been  consistent  with  what  he  had  been  wont 
to  teach.  One  can  readily  feel  the  force  of  this 
consideration  by  asking  himself  what  chance  there 
would  be  of  foisting  upon  the  Congregational 
churches  in  our  own  time  a  volume  which  falsely 
pretended  to  contain  the  theological  system  of  the 
late  Professor  Park,  when  there  are  so  many  of 
his  former  pupils  scattered  aU  over  the  world  who 
could  readily  expose  the  fraud. 

Moreover,  there  is  an  important  consideration 
which  justifies  the  practical  religionist  in  discount- 
ing, to  some  extent,  the  future,  and  anticipating  a 
yet  firmer  establishment  of  the  general  trustworthi- 
ness of  the  New  Testament  records.  The  base-line 
of  every  system  of  triangulation  must  be  measured 
off  as  accurately  as  can  be  done  with  the  aid  of  the 
most  exact  and  delicate  instruments,  for  an  error 
in  it  will  be  repeated  in  every  subsequent  calcula- 
tion, and  may  be  enlarged,  a  thousand  miles  away, 
from  inches  into  rods.  Impressed  by  this  fact,  the 
United  States  government,  a  number  of  years  ago, 
had  the  line  from  which  are  derived  the  distances  on 
our  coast-survey  charts  remeasured;  but  the  en- 
gineers, after  going  over  a  mile  or  two,  and  find- 
ing that  their  measurement  differed  from  the  pre- 
vious one,  as  I  have  heard  stated,  by  less  than  the 
diameter  of  a  puncture  made  by  a  cambric  needle 
in  a  copper  plate,  deemed  it  needless  to  proceed, 


CHRISTIAN  SUPERNATURALISM  133 

altliougli  the  line,  as  I  remember,  was  five  miles  in 
length.  And  no  one  would  doubt  that  they  were 
justified  in  so  doing  by  the  induction  they  had  just 
performed. 

Now,  the  primitive  church  has  handed  down  to 
us  a  collection  of  books  which  may  be  called  the 
base-line  of  modern  Christianity.  It  is  upon  cer- 
tain traditional  views  as  to  the  date,  authorship, 
and  general  trustworthiness  of  these  books  that 
current  orthodoxy  largely  rests.  For  more  than 
a  thousand  years  the  conclusions  of  the  ancient 
church  on  these  points  were  practically  unques- 
tioned; but  during  the  greater  part  of  the  century 
that  has  just  closed,  the  correctness  of  the  old 
measurements  has  been  strenuously  denied.  The 
traditional  view  regarding  perhaps  every  book  in 
the  New  Testament,  except  the  first  four  Epistles, 
has  been  powerfully  and  persistently  assailed,  and 
even  these  have  not  always  escaped  attack.  It  is 
safe  to  say  that  about  aU  that  learning,  scholarship, 
and  mental  acuteness  could  do  to  undermine  con- 
fidence in  the  accepted  theory  as  to  the  origin  of 
these  books  has  already  been  done.  The  contro- 
versy is  still  going  on,  and  it  is  virtually  a  new 
survey  of  the  original  line. 

Now  what  is  the  residt  thus  far  ?  The  foiu* 
Epistles  just  mentioned  stand  unimpeached;  the 
traditional  dates  of  the  four  Gospels  have  been 
practically  reestablished;  what  had  come  to  be 
called  "  the  critical  heresy  "  of  ascribing  the  Johan- 
nine  writings  to  a  single  author  has  an  advocate 


134    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

in  the  greatest  living  ecclesiastical  historian ;  i  the 
Book  of  Acts  is  recognized  by  him  as  a  genuine 
history,  written  considerably  before  the  close  of  the 
first  century  by  the  author  of  the  Third  Gospel ; 
while  Kenan  conceded  the  genuineness  of  all  the 
letters  ascribed  to  Paul  save  the  pastoral  Epistles, 
and  these  he  excepted  only  because  he  believed, 
what  is  by  no  means  certain,  that  the  apostle  to 
the  Gentiles  died  A.  D.  64. 

Now  we  have  here  an  induction  sufficiently  ex- 
tensive to  warrant  us  in  believing  that  the  early 
measurement  may  be  trusted,  that  the  critical  sense 
of  the  ancient  church  is  entitled  to  more  respect 
than  it  has  been  wont  of  late  to  receive.  It  is  the 
very  purpose  and  essence  of  inductive  reasoning  to 
draw  from  known  facts  inferences  regarding  others 
which  cannot  as  yet  be  tested.  In  the  present 
case  we  shall  be  acting  quite  within  our  logical 
rights  if  we  conclude  from  the  many  points  in 
which  the  judgment  of  the  early  critics  has  now 
been  verified,  that  their  opinions  wiU  in  the  end  be 
found  equally  accurate  in  all  other  essential  par- 
ticulars which  are  stiU  a  subject  of  dispute.  We 
certainly  cannot  be  reasonably  expected  to  suspend 
judgment  in  so  important  a  matter  as  the  origin  of 
our  sacred  books,  and  so  to  deprive  ourselves  of  the 
influence  of  their  most  inspiring  teachings,  until 
slow  criticism  shall  have  made  its  final  report, 
when  the  trend  of  its  results  is  manifestly  towards 
the  traditional  views,  and  when  we  can  already  urge 

1  The  New  World,  September,  1897. 


CHRISTIAN  SUPERNATURALISM  135 

in  support  of  these  an  induction  the  same  in  kind, 
if  not  in  degree,  as  that  on  which  the  whole  elabo- 
rate system  of  measurements  rests  which  gives  us 
our  distances  along  thousands  of  miles  of  sea-coast. 
That  the  evangehsts  have  faithfully  reported  the 
words  of  Christ  there  can  be  no  serious  doubt. 
"  Who  among  his  disciples,  or  among  their  prose- 
lytes," asks  John  Stuart  Mill,i  "was  capable  of 
inventing  the  sayings  ascribed  to  Jesus,  or  of 
imagining  the  life  and  character  revealed  in  the 
Gospels  ?  Certainly  not  the  fishermen  of  Galilee. 
As  certainly  not  Paul,  whose  character  and  idio- 
syncrasies were  of  a  totally  different  sort.  Still 
less  the  early  Christian  writers,  in  whom  nothing 
is  more  evident  than  that  the  good  which  was  in 
them  was  all  derived,  as  they  professed  that  it  was 
derived,  from  a  higher  source."  And  Professor 
Eomanes  ^  says  :  "  One  of  the  strongest  pieces  of 
objective  evidence  in  favor  of  Christianity  ...  is 
the  absence  from  the  biographies  of  Christ  of  any 
doctrines  which  the  subsequent  growth  of  human 
knowledge,  whether  in  natural  science,  ethics,  polit- 
ical economy,  or  elsewhere,  has  had  to  discount. 
.  .  .  Even  Plato's  Dialogues  have  absurdities  in 
reason  and  shock  the  moral  sense,  yet  it  is  con- 
fessedly the  highest  level  of  human  reason  on  the 
lines  of  spirituality  when  unaided  by  alleged  reve- 
lation." These  and  all  other  considerations  which 
make  it  impossible  for  us  to  beheve  that  the  evan- 

1  Essays  on  Religion,  p.  253. 

2  Thoughts  on  Religion,  p.  157.     (Longmans,  Green  &  Co.) 


136    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

gelical  writers  could  have  originated  the  sayings  of 
Christ  prove  in  the  most  convincing  manner  that 
they  were  describing  an  actual  character.  By  as 
much  as  we  concede  that  the  man  whom  they  por- 
tray surpassed  the  power  of  human  imagination 
and  invention,  by  so  much  do  we  oblige  ourselves 
to  admit  that  they  have  been  faithful  in  recording 
his  life  and  teachings. 

Now,  that  they  were  so  scrupulously  careful  to 
report  his  words  and  portray  his  character  correctly 
but  were  not  equally  so  in  relating  the  incidents  of 
his  life  is  psychologically  incredible.  They  must 
have  felt  tempted  to  smooth  down  some  of  his 
harsher  sayings.  That  they  did  not  do  so  to  any 
considerable  extent  is  shown  by  the  substantial 
harmony  of  their  reports ;  and  it  evinces  an  histor- 
ical fidelity  and  conscientiousness  on  their  part 
which  it  would  be  unreasonable  to  deny  to  them 
when  they  are  narrating  the  works  of  Jesus.  Even 
Luke,  who  is  credited  with  more  freedom  in  han- 
dling his  material  than  is  either  of  the  other  Synop- 
tists,  only  clarifies  the  meaning  of  the  text  by  his 
editorial  changes.  That  he  would  abandon  this 
accurate  conservative  spirit  in  recording  the  events 
with  which  the  public  career  of  Jesus  was  so 
thickly  studded  is  beyond  belief. 

The  force  of  this  consideration  is  immeasura- 
bly enhanced  by  the  fact  that  the  miracles  as  a 
whole  bear  the  stamp  of  the  same  original  mind 
which  has  expressed  itself  in  the  parables.  They 
are  essentially  parables,  differing  from  them  only 


CHRISTIAN   SUPERNATURALISM  137 

in  the  immaterial  fact  that  they  teach  by  signs 
rather  than  by  words.  In  both  cases  the  meaning 
lies  beneath  the  surface,  and  the  shell  must  be 
broken  before  the  kernel  can  be  found.  This 
feature  of  the  miracles,  the  pictorial  and  dramatic 
illustration  which  they  so  graphically  afford  of  the 
profoundest  religious  truths,  the  striking  harmony 
there  is  between  them  and  the  oral  teachinas  of 
Jesus,  precludes  the  idea  that  they  were  later  ac- 
cretions to  the  record  of  Christ's  life.  Their  very 
depth  and  spirituality  negative  such  a  theory. 
There  is  a  peculiar  appropriateness  in  them,  a  par- 
allelism with  the  moral  teachings  of  Jesus,  which 
stamps  them  as  an  integral  part  of  the  original 
message. 

Nor  is  it  of  any  avail  to  urge  against  the  credi- 
bility of  the  resurrection  the  uncritical  character 
of  the  earliest  observers.  There  is  a  bit  of  sophis- 
try in  this  hackneyed  objection  which  cannot  be 
too  often  exposed.  There  are  facts  which  can  be 
established  just  as  well  by  the  testimony  of  uncrit- 
ical observers  as  by  that  of  an  equal  niunber  of 
trained  experts.  No  man  is  so  ignorant  and  super- 
stitious that  his  testimony  in  the  witness-box  as  to 
whether  he  had  seen  an  intimate  friend  at  a  given 
place  and  time  would  not  equal  in  value,  if  he  were 
believed  to  be  honest,  that  of  a  college  professor  to 
the  same  fact.  If  a  school-teacher  is  reported  to 
have  sailed  for  Europe  and  a  dozen  of  her  pupils 
declare  a  week  afterwards  that  they  have  just  met 
and  talked  with  her  on  the  street,  they  may  not  be 


138    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

over  ten  years  of  age  and  yet  their  testimony  will 
outweigh  that  of  a  dozen  able  lawyers  who  may 
try  to  prove  that  she  could  not  have  been  in  the 
country.  The  evidence  of  critical  observers  has 
no  superior  value  save  in  cases  where  critical  ob- 
servation is  needed.  That  the  disci]3les  were  not 
competent  to  say  whether  or  not  they  had  met  and 
conversed  with  their  Master  after  his  crucifixion, 
and  that  the  early  historians,  when  they  were  not 
themselves  disciples,  were  not  capable  of  relating 
accurately  what  the  disciples  had  reported  in  this 
connection,  is  not  only  incredible  in  itself,  but,  as 
already  remarked,  is  inconsistent  with  the  ability 
they  have  displayed  in  communicating  or  recording 
other  matters  demanding  precision  of  statement 
and  clearness  of  recollection. 

Let  us  now  briefly  reconsider  what  is  required 
of  us  by  those  who  would  forbid  us  to  hold  as  true 
the  story  of  Christ's  resurrection.  We  are  to  throw 
away  the  only  link  which  connects  the  history  of 
the  last  eighteen  hundred  years  with  that  of  the 
preceding  age,  and  so  create  an  inexplicable  and 
permanent  gap  in  the  annals  of  the  human  race ; 
we  are  to  concede  that  the  great  ethical  progress  of 
mankind  during  those  years  was  made  possible 
only  because  in  the  providence  of  God  an  unac- 
countable delusion  arose  and  was  perpetuated  for 
centuries ;  we  are  to  suppose  that,  contrary  to  all 
historical  precedent  and  all  psychological  probabil- 
ity, a  dozen  hard-headed,  unimaginative  working- 
men  wrongly  believed  that  they  had  beheld  and 


CHRISTIAN  SUPERNATURALISM  139 

talked  with  a  most  intimate  friend  on  many  occa- 
sions after  his  death,  himself  the  most  unique  and 
inimitable  personality  the  world  has  ever  seen; 
we  are  to  hold,  contrary  again  to  what  we  know 
of  the  natural  working  of  the  human  mind,  that 
men  who  were  scrupulously  careful  in  recording 
the  words  of  Christ  parted  with  all  historical  vera- 
city when  relating  his  deeds,  and  not  only  allowed 
themselves  to  describe  minutely  his  resurrection 
from  the  dead,  although  it  had  not  occurred,  but 
even  attributed  to  him  various  utterances  made 
beforehand  in  reference  to  that  imaginary  event 
and  at  different  times  after  it  had  taken  place. 
And  why  are  we  to  do  all  this  ?  Merely  to  evade 
the  otherwise  irresistible  inference  that  God  has 
pieced  out  the  laws  of  a  lower  by  those  of  a  higher 
world  in  order  to  impart  to  the  human  race  a 
moral  light  and  stimulus  which  it  would  not  other- 
wise have  obtained,  and  without  which  no  high  ethi- 
cal development  was  to  be  looked  for.  Would  it 
not  be  more  rational  for  us,  if  we  believe  in  God, 
to  believe  that  he  is  godlike  ?  that  he  has  set  a 
higher  value  on  the  moral  welfare  of  the  human 
race  than  on  alleged  precedents  in  natural  law  ? 

It  was  not  an  error,  then,  that  Paul  founded 
his  whole  mission  on  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  for 
the  supernaturalism  inseparable  from  traditional 
Christianity  rests  upon  it.  "  Beyond  controversy," 
says  Strauss,!  "  the  truth  of  Christianity  stands  or 
falls  with  the  resurrection  of  Jesus."  If  it  cannot 
1  Boston  Lectures,  1871,  p.  375. 


140    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

be  credited,  no  otlier  miracle  can.  If  it  may  be 
legitimately  believed,  the  wall  of  rationalism  is 
breached  and  must  crumble  rapidly.  If  one  mira- 
cle is  admitted,  relatively  little  evidence  is  needed 
to  prove  a  second.  The  ascension  is  a  natural 
and  consistent  sequel  to  the  resurrection,  for  in  no 
other  way  is  the  idtimate  disappearance  of  Christ 
from  the  earth  accounted  for.  The  incarnation  is 
almost  presupposed,  for  one  who  left  the  world  in 
so  exceptional  a  manner  may  easily  be  believed  to 
have  entered  it  in  some  extraordinary  way.  That 
marvels  should  mark  the  intervening  career  of  one 
who  came  and  went  so  impressively  could  hardly 
excite  surprise,  especially  when  they  exliibit  the 
same  individuality  and  originality  which  inhere  in 
the  oral  teachings  of  him  who  wrought  them  and 
illustrate  spiritual  truths  that  are  above  the  aver- 
age human  comprehension. 

The  diminished  need  of  evidence  extends,  also, 
even  to  the  wonders  recorded  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. If  we  find  gold  at  the  mouth  of  a  stream, 
we  shall  not  be  surprised  to  learn  that  some  grains 
have  been  discovered  miles  away  among  the  hills 
from  which  the  water  flows.  If  Christianity  has 
had  its  miracles,  it  was  to  have  been  expected  that 
the  religion  out  of  which  it  sprang  was  not  whoUy 
without  them.  And  it  cannot  but  be  a  dubious 
and  rash  proceeding  at  the  best  to  assume  that 
every  supernatural  tale  in  the  older  books  is  false, 
and  to  rewrite  Jewish  history  in  the  light  of  that 
assumption. 


CHAPTER  VI 

A   STUDY   OF    HUMAN   TESTIMONY 

I  HAVE  indicated  in  the  foregoing  chapter  that 
if  a  miracle  is  not  in  itseK  incapable  of  being 
proved,  or,  in  other  words,  if  any  conceivable  vol- 
ume of  testimony  could  demonstrate  that  a  strictly 
supernatural  event  ever  took  place,  the  evidence 
for  the  resurrection  of  Christ  is  sufficient  both 
in  quality  and  quantity  to  entitle  that  occurrence 
to  a  place  among  the  practical  working  beliefs  of 
religious  men.  In  doing  so,  however,  I  have  as- 
sumed that  the  evidence  is  in  harmony  with  itself, 
that  there  is  no  doubt  as  to  what  it  really  teaches. 
Lest  it  may  be  thought,  however,  that  I  have 
ignored  an  important  objection  to  the  credibility  of 
the  resurrection  by  failing  to  notice  the  alleged 
disagreements  q.nd  coiiiradlctions  among  the  wit- 
nesses who  have  reported  it,  I  may  be  pardoned  if 
I  treat  this  subject  at  considerable  length.  I  am 
all  the  more  disposed  to  do  so  because  I  think  it 
is  one  which,  as  a  rule,  is  imperfectly  understood. 

How  close  a  correspondence  have  we  a  right 
to  expect  in  independent  narratives  of  the  same 
event?  Or,  to  state  the  same  question  in  a  dif- 
ferent way,  to  what  extent  is  the  general  credi- 


142    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

bility  of  history  impaired  by  discrepancies  in  the 
accounts  of  those  who  relate  it  ?  It  is  important 
to  be  able  to  give  at  least  aj)proximately  correct 
answers  to  these  questions,  for  otherwise  we  can 
form  no  proper  estimate  of  the  value  of  the  Chris- 
tian evidences. 

That  peculiarly  unreasonable  and  impracticable 
views  are  held  in  this  connection  appears  from  the 
character  of  the  discrepancies  which  are  frequently 
cited  as  affecting  the  trustworthiness  of  the  gospel 
narratives.  For  example,  Matthew  states  that 
Jesus  was  met  on  one  occasion  by  two  demoniacs, 
but  Mark  and  Luke  in  their  accounts  of  the  same 
incident  mention  but  one.  Again,  Matthew  and 
Mark  describe  the  healing  of  a  blind  man  as  Jesus 
was  approaching  Jericho,  but  the  Third  Gospel 
says  it  took  place  after  he  had  left  that  city.  In 
this  same  account,  also,  Matthew  relates  that  two 
men  were  cured,  but  Mark  and  Luke  agree  in 
mentioning  but  one.  Once  more,  the  tradition  or 
the  documentary  source  from  which  the  Synoptists 
are  supposed  to  have  derived  their  material  gave 
apparently  the  fifteenth  of  Nisan  as  the  date  of  the 
crucifixion,  but  the  Fourth  Gospel  is  commonly 
understood  to  assign  it  to  the  fourteenth.  These 
may  serve  as  a  sample  of  the  discrepancies  which 
have  often  been  urged  as  making  against  the  gen- 
eral credibility  of  the  sacred  narratives. 

It  may  be  freely  granted  that  to  one  who  holds 
the  old  theory  of  verbal  inspiration  such  disagree- 
ments might  present  insoluble  difficulties.     That 


A  STUDY  OF  HUMAN  TESTIMONY        143 

the  Holy  Spirit  would  dictate  two  irreconcilable 
versions  of  the  same  event  is  not  to  be  supposed, 
and  the  shifts  that  must  sometimes  be  resorted  to 
by  advocates  of  that  theory  in  order  to  avoid  such 
a  conclusion  are  little  calculated  to  enhance  respect 
for  the  historic  value  of  the  Christian  records. 
But  assuming  that  the  inspiration  of  the  New 
Testament  affords  an  illustration  of  what  might 
be  called  an  economy  of  the  supernatural,  that  it 
connotes  no  more  of  special  divine  assistance  than 
is  necessary  to  bring  certain  religious  truths  within 
reach  of  normal  human  faculties,  that  it  means,  in 
the  present  case,  not  such  an  influence  brought  to 
bear  on  witnesses  as  would  change  the  inherent 
character  of  human  testimony,  but  only  such  a 
providential  use  of  such  testimony,  with  all  its 
natural  defects  and  inaccuracies,  as  would  render 
it  a  competent  medium  for  the  communication  of 
vital  historical  facts,  are  the  alleged  discrepancies 
in  the  sacred  writings  inconsistent  either  with  a 
rational  view  of  the  inspiration  of  these  writings 
or  with  their  obvious  aim  to  serve  as  reliable 
sources  of  religious  information  ? 

We  can  determine  the  true  answer  to  this  question 
only  by  acquainting  ourselves  accurately  with  the 
character  of  human  testimony  in  general,  and  espe- 
cially by  ascertaining  how  nearly  witnesses  usually 
agree  when  reporting  important  events  which  are 
well  calculated  to  make  a  deep  impression  on  the 
memory,  and  when  they  evidently  mean  to  report 
them  correctly.     I  am  able  to  furnish  a  striking 


144    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

illustration  wHch  tends  to  show  how  unreasonable 
it  is  to  look  for  entire  harmony  among  competent 
witnesses  even  to  an  event  of  superlative  signifi- 
cance, and,  on  the  other  hand,  how  needless  it  is, 
so  far  as  the  general  credibility  of  an  account  is 
concerned,  that  there  should  be  a  perfect  agree- 
ment in  the  reports  of  those  who  relate  it. 

My  example  is  rendered  peculiarly  pertinent 
and  impressive  by  the  high  character  of  the  wit- 
nesses who  are  quoted.  It  is  very  seldom  that  a 
case  is  tried  in  court  in  which  the  evidence  is  fur- 
nished by  persons  of  so  high  standing.  They  are 
General  Philip  H.  Sheridan,  of  the  United  States 
Army,  Arcliibald  Forbes,  the  distinguished  Eng- 
lish newspaper  correspondent,  Count  von  Bis- 
marck, Dr.  Busch,  his  secretary  and  biographer, 
Dr.  RusseU,  the  famous  representative  of  the 
"London  Times,"  besides  a  weaver  named  Four- 
naise  and  his  wife,  who,  although  of  a  lower  social 
and  mental  grade  than  the  others,  were  apparently 
none  the  less  competent  to  observe  intelligently 
and  report  correctly  the  facts  which  they  relate. 
The  matter  to  which  they  all  testify  is  the  surren- 
der of  Napoleon  the  Third  at  Sedan,  one  of  the 
most  striking,  if  not  startling,  events  of  the  nine- 
teenth century.  It  would  seem  that  an  occurrence 
of  such  magnitude  described  by  persons  so  emi- 
nent as,  with  two  exceptions,  these  were,  most  of 
whom  were  eyewitnesses  of  the  incidents  they  nar- 
rate, while  the  others  derived  their  information 
directly   from   participants   in   what   took   place, 


A  STUDY  OF  HUMAN  TESTIMONY        145 

would  be  sure  to  be  reported  in  such  a  manner  as 
to  leave  no  reasonable  doubt  as  to  anything  that 
actually  occurred.  How  far  short  of  a  complete 
fulfillment  tliis  anticipation  would  fall  may  be 
seen  in  what  follows,  which  I  have  taken  from  an 
article  by  Archibald  Forbes  in  the  "  Nineteenth 
Century  "  for  March,  1892.  I  will  give  first  in  a 
condensed  form  the  testimony  of  each  witness  in 
succession,  and  then  point  out  the  discrepancies  in 
their  several  narratives. 

1.  The  facts  according  to  General  Sheridan. 

"  About  that  hour  (6  A.  M.)  there  came  through 
the  gate  an  open  carriage  containing  two  men,  one 
of  whom  Sheridan  recognized  as  the  Emperor  Na- 
poleon." (Note  by  Archibald  Forbes  :  "  Sheridan 
always  persisted  vehemently  that  the  carriage  con- 
tained but  two  men,  all  evidence  to  the  contrary 
notwithstanding.  '  Must  I  not  believe  my  own 
eyes ! '  he  exclaimed  to  me  not  three  months  be- 
fore his  death.")  "  Sheridan  followed  the  carriage 
towards  Donchery.  Not  quite  a  mile  short  of  that 
place  it  halted  to  await  the  arrival  of  Bismarck. 
After  Bismarck  came,  the  party  moved  on  about 
one  hundred  yards  and  stopped  opposite  a  weaver's 
cottage.  The  Emperor  and  Bismarck  entered  the 
cottage.  Reappearing  in  a  quarter  of  an  hour,  they 
seated  themselves  in  the  open  air  on  chairs  brought 
by  the  weaver.  They  talked  there  for  fully  an 
hour." 

2.  Bismarck's  account,  as  given  to  Busch  a  few 
days  later  :  — 


146    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

About  6  A.  M.  General  Reille  appeared  at  Bis- 
marck's quarters  at  Donchery  and  asked  liim  to 
come  to  tke  Emperor.  He  met  the  Emperor  at 
Frenois,  a  mile  and  three  fourths  from  Donchery. 
Napoleon  was  seated  in  a  carriage  with  three  offi- 
cers, and  there  were  three  others  on  horseback. 
Napoleon  stopped  his  carriage  opposite  a  weaver's 
cottage  two  hundred  paces  from  the  village  (Fre- 
nois) and  desired  to  remain  there.  Bismarck  ac- 
companied him  to  a  small  room  on  the  first  floor, 
with  one  window.  The  conversation  here  lasted 
nearly  three  quarters  of  an  hour.  Bismarck  rode 
away  to  Donchery  to  dress,  and,  on  his  return 
in  full  uniform,  conducted  Napoleon  to  Chateau 
Bellevue  with  a  guard  of  honor  of  cuirassiers. 

3.  Bismarck,  in  his  official  report,  "  specifically 
states  that  his  long  interview  with  the  Emperor, 
'  which  lasted  nearly  an  hour,'  was  held  inside  the 
weaver's  cottage  "  (Forbes). 

4.  Archibald  Forbes's  account :  — 

"  The  following  is  what  I  personally  saw,  con- 
densed from  very  copious  notes  taken  at  the  time, 
watch  in  hand. 

"  Looking  out  from  my  bedroom  window  into  the 
Place  of  Donchery  at  one  quarter  to  six  in  the 
morning  (September  2),  I  observed  a  sad-faced 
French  officer  turning  his  horse  away  from  Bis- 
marck's quarters.  (Knew  him  afterwards  to  be 
General  Reille.)  He  had  scarcely  disappeared  when 
Bismarck  emerged  and  followed  his  track  on  a  bay 
horse.     We  followed  him  promptly  on  foot.     Fell 


A  STUDY  OF  HUMAN  TESTIMONY        147 

behind  but  pusbed  on,  and  at  about  two  kilometres 
from  Donchery  met  an  open  carriage  in  which  sat 
four  officers  in  French  uniform.  In  one  of  them 
we  simultaneously  recognized  the  Emperor.  Be- 
hind, close  to  the  carriage,  rode  Bismarck,  followed 
by  Reille  and  two  other  French  officers.  The 
carriage  halted  in  front  of  a  weaver's  cottage  at 
Napoleon's  instance.  I  saw  him  turn  round,  and 
heard  the  request  he  made  to  Bismarck.  The 
Emperor  hurried  behind  the  house  (7.10),  while 
Bismarck  and  Reille  went  in  but  almost  immedi- 
ately came  out.  Soon  the  Emperor  returned,  and 
he  and  Bismarck  then  entered,  going  up  to  the 
first  floor.  At  twenty  minutes  past  seven  they 
came  out,  Bismarck  a  few  moments  in  advance, 
sat  down  in  front  of  the  cottage,  and  had  an  out- 
door conversation  which  lasted  nearly  an  hour. 
Bismarck  used  the  gesture  of  bringing  a  finger  of 
the  left  hand  down  on  the  palm  of  the  right.  The 
weaver  was  all  the  time  overlooking  the  pair  from 
the  window.  (I  asked  him  if  he  overheard  any- 
thing. He  said,  '  No,  because  they  spoke  in  Ger- 
man.' Bismarck,  he  said,  —  i.  e., '  Monsieur  in  the 
white  cap,'  —  addressed  him  in  French,  but  the 
Emperor  said,  '  Let  us  talk  in  German.')  At  eight 
Moltke  came,  but  twenty  minutes  later  left.  Bis- 
marck departed  at  twenty  minutes  to  nine." 

5.  Bismarck  again :  — 

He  happened  to  see  Forbes's  letter  and  instructed 
Busch  to  contradict  certain  of  his  statements.  He 
persevered   in  the    statement  that  he  had   spent 


148    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

three  fourths  of  an  hour  at  least  inside  the  cottage 
in  an  upstairs  room,  and  was  only  a  short  time 
outside  with  the  Emperor.  He  did  not  strike  his 
finger  into  his  pahn,  which  was  no  trick  of  his. 
Did  not  speak  German  with  the  Emperor,  but  did 
with  the  people  of  the  house. 

6.  Dr.  RusseU  (narrative  of  an  account  given  to 
him  by  Bismarck)  :  — 

"  I  proposed  that  we  should  go  into  a  httle  cot- 
tage close  at  hand,  but  the  house  was  not  clean, 
and  so  chairs  were  brought  outside  and  we  sat 
together  talking." 

7.  Recollections  of  Madame  Fournaise,  the  weav- 
er's wife,  while  the  events  were  fresh  in  her  memory: 

"  The  Emperor,  disliking  to  pass  through  the 
crowds  of  German  soldiers  on  the  road  to  Don- 
chery,"  came  into  her  room.  For  a  quarter  of  an 
hour  he  and  Bismarck  conversed  in  low  tones  in 
German,  of  which  she,  remaining  in  the  outer 
room,  occasionally  caught  a  word.  Then  Bismarck 
rose  and  came  clattering  out.  "  II  avait  une  tres 
mauvaise  mine."  She  warned  him  of  the  break- 
neck stairs,  but  he  sprang  down  them  like  a  man 
of  twenty,  mounted  his  horse,  and  rode  away 
towards  Donchery.  When  she  entered  the  room 
in  which  the  Emperor  was  left,  she  found  him  with 
his  face  buried  in  his  hands.  "  Can  I  do  anything 
for  you  ?  "  she  asked.  "  Only  puU  down  the  blinds," 
was  his  answer.  He  would  not  speak  to  General 
Lebrun,  who  came  to  him.  In  about  half  an  hour 
Bismarck  returned  in  full  dress  and  preceded  the 


A  STUDY  OF  HUMAN  TESTIMONY        149 

Emperor  downstairs.  The  Emperor  quitted  the 
house  and  entered  the  carriage  which  was  to  con- 
vey him  to  Chateau  Bellevue.  On  the  threshold 
he  gave  her  four  twenty-franc  pieces.  "  He  put 
them  into  my  own  hand,  and  said  plaintively, '  This 
is  perhaps  the  last  hospitahty  I  shall  receive  in 
France.'  " 

8.  Forbes  again :  — 

"  Madame  Fournaise's  memory  has  failed  her. 
After  Bismarck's  departure  Napoleon,  who  was 
then  out-of-doors,  sauntered  up  and  down  the  path, 
limping  sHghtly  and  smoking  hard.  Later  he  sat 
down  among  the  officers.  At  quarter  past  nine 
came  cuirassiers  and  formed  a  cordon  round  the 
rear  of  the  block  of  cottages.  A  lieutenant,  with- 
out a  sign  of  salute,  stationed  two  troopers  behind 
the  Emperor  and  commanded,  '  Draw  swords ! '  At 
quarter  to  ten  Bismarck  returned." 

Let  us  now  consider  the  discrepancies  in  the 
above  accounts. 

Sheridan  said  there  were  only  two  men  in  the 
carriage,  and  persisted  in  the  statement  as  long 
as  he  lived.  Bismarck,  according  to  Busch,  said 
there  were  four,  and  is  corroborated  by  Forbes. 

Sheridan  makes  no  mention  of  mounted  officers 
accompanying  the  carriage.  Bismarck  says  there 
were  three,  and  so  does  Forbes,  who  states  that 
one  of  them  was  General  Beille. 

Sheridan  says  Bismarck  met  the  Emperor  not 
quite    a   mile  from  Donchery.     Bismarck  says  a 


150    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

mile  and  three  fourths.  Forbes  says  he  himself 
met  the  carriage  about  a  mile  and  one  quarter 
(two  kilometers)  from  Donchery.  (Bismarck  had 
already  met  it  and  was  returning  with  it.) 

Sheridan  says  Bismarck  and  Napoleon  remained 
in  the  cottage  a  quarter  of  an  hour  and  then 
talked  outside  for  fully  an  hour ;  Bismarck  (per 
Busch)  that  he  conversed  i7i  the  room  for  nearly 
three  quarters  of  an  hour.  (No  mention  of  any 
conversation  outside.)  In  his  official  report  he 
states  that  the  interview  was  in  the  cottage  and 
lasted  nearly  an  hour.  (Still  no  reference  to  any 
talk  outside.)  Forbes  declares  that  the  Emperor 
alighted  at  7.10,  came  out  of  the  house  at  7.20, 
and  that  the  conversation  out-of-doors  lasted  nearly 
an  hour.  Bismarck  corrects  this  statement  and 
reiterates  that  he  spent  at  least  three  quarters  of 
an  hour  in  the  house,  but  only  a  short  time  with 
the  Emperor  outside.  Russell  reports  that  Bis- 
marck told  him  that  the  house  was  not  clean,  that 
"  chairs  were  brought  outside  and  we  sat  together 
talking."  Madame  Fournaise  says  they  talked  in 
the  room  for  a  quarter  of  an  hour  but,  by  necessary 
implication,  not  outside  at  all. 

Bismarck  (per  Busch)  says  that  Napoleon  pro- 
posed to  enter  the  cottage.  Forbes  agrees,  hav- 
ing heard  Napoleon  make  the  request.  Dr.  Rus- 
sell says  Bismarck  told  him  that  he  (Bismarck) 
proposed  it.  Madame  Fournaise  incidentally  cor- 
roborates the  majority  by  her  explanation  that 
Napoleon  was  unwilling  to  pass  through  the  Ger- 
man troops. 


A  STUDY  OF  HUMAN  TESTIMONY        151 

Forbes  testifies  that  the  weaver  said  they  spoke 
German  outside.  Madame  Fournaise  affirms  that 
they  did  inside,  and  that  she  caught  a  word  now 
and  then.    Bismarck  denies  that  they  did  so  at  all. 

Forbes  says  Bismarck  made  a  particular  gesture 
with  his  finger  ;  Bismarck  says  he  did  not,  and  that 
he  has  no  such  trick. 

Now  most  of  these  discrepancies  may  be  con- 
jecturally  explained  in  harmony  with  well-known 
principles  of  mental  action.  Assuming  provision- 
ally that  the  narrative  of  Forbes  is  the  most  likely 
to  be  correct,  for  the  reason  that  it  was  a  part  of 
his  business  to  make  his  statements  accurate,  that 
it  was  necessary  for  him  to  put  them  in  writing 
immediately  in  order  that  liis  paper  might  receive 
them  promptly,  and  that  he  was  so  alive  to  the 
importance  of  precision  that  he  made  his  observa- 
tions "  watch  in  hand,"  we  have  a  standard  into 
conformity  with  which  we  can  bring  most  of  the 
discordant  utterances  without  transcending  the 
bounds  of  reasonable  supposition. 

The  disagreements  as  to  distance  can  be  plausi- 
bly explained  by  the  familiar  fact  that  people  vary 
very  much  in  their  capacity  to  estimate  it,  but 
more  especially  by  the  consideration  that  there  is 
likely  to  be  a  great  difference  between  an  estimate 
made  on  the  spot  and  one  made  afterwards  from 
only  a  recollection  of  the  spot.  General  Sheridan's 
rooted  conviction  that  there  were  but  two  officers 
in  the  carriage  is  easily  accounted  for  when  it  is 


152    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

considered  that  men  are  much  more  likely  to  be 
mistaken  when  they  maintain  that  what  they  do 
not  remember  did  not  happen  than  when  they 
contend  that  what  they  do  remember  did  occur. 
His  possible  ignorance  of  the  fact  that  there  were 
mounted  officers  present  may  only  show  that  the 
circumstance  made  no  lasting  impression  on  his 
memory.  His  testimony  could,  from  the  very  na- 
ture of  the  case,  only  be  negative,  viz. :  that  he  did 
not  recollect  seeing  four  men  in  the  carriage  and, 
perhaps,  three  horsemen  behind  it.  His  testimony 
when  thus  expressed  does  not  contradict  that  of 
the  others.  His  question,  "  Must  I  not  believe  my 
own  eyes  ?  "  does  not  convey  a  right  view  of  the 
case.  It  is  much  less  convincing  when  put  in  the 
proper  form  :  Must  I  not  believe  that  that  did  not 
exist  which  I  may  have  forgotten  that  I  saw  ? 

The  disagreement  as  to  who  proposed  to  enter 
the  cottage,  in  which  Bismarck  is  quoted  against 
himself,  cannot  be  easily  explained  except  by  as- 
suming some  carelessness  on  his  part  in  expressing 
himseK  or  some  misunderstanding  of  his  remarks 
on  the  part  of  Dr.  Russell. 

The  testimony  as  to  the  time  spent  in  the  cot- 
tage and  outside  is  hard  to  reconcile.  That  the 
exact  time  spent  within  was  not  quite  ten  minutes 
seems  settled  by  Forbes's  accurate  specifications. 
The  Emperor  alighted  at  7.10  by  the  watch  and 
came  out  of  the  house  at  7.20.  Sheridan  practi- 
cally agrees  with  Forbes.  They  remained  in  the 
cottage  a  quarter  of  an  hour,  he  says.    As  this  was 


A  STUDY  OF  HUMAN  TESTIMONY        153 

probably  only  an  estimate  made  from  memory, 
after  the  event,  it  may  be  regarded  as  tallying  well 
enough  with  Forbes's  statement.  The  same,  of 
course,  may  be  said  of  Madame  Fournaise's  testi- 
mony that  they  talked  in  the  room  for  a  quarter 
of  an  hour.  This  point,  then,  would  be  regarded 
as  determined  beyond  all  doubt,  were  it  not  for 
Bismarck's  persistent  declarations.  "  We  con- 
versed in  the  room  for  nearly  three  quarters  of  an 
hour,"  he  told  Busch,  while  in  his  official  report  he 
lengthens  the  time  and  says  the  interview  in  the 
cottage  lasted  nearly  an  hour.  And  again,  after 
seeing  Forbes's  account,  he  took  pains  to  have 
Busch  reaffirm  that  at  least  three  quarters  of  an 
hour  were  spent  within  the  house. 

But  these  statements,  while  they  leave  no  doubt 
in  our  minds  as  to  the  length  of  time  Bismarck 
fii'mly  believed  he  had  remained  in  the  house, 
would  not  of  themselves  give  us  much  trouble. 
In  nothing  do  men  disagree  oftener  than  in  their 
estimates  of  time.  The  minutes  pass  very  rapidly 
with  one  person  while  they  seem  to  another  to 
drag.  A  pleasant  interview  might  seem  short, 
while  one  of  a  disagreeable  nature  would  seem 
long.  That  Bismarck's  interview  was  of  the  latter 
kind  would  not  appear  doubtful  if  we  can  trust 
Madame  Fournaise's  statement  that  he  emerged 
from  it  with  a  scowling  countenance.  As  it  is  not 
at  all  likely  that  he  consulted  his  watch  in  order  to 
determine  the  time  precisely,  it  might  be  plausibly 
conjectured  that  the  interview  was  so  painful  that 


154    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

it  seemed  long  to  him,  and  that  when  he  came 
afterwards  to  translate  into  figures  the  impression 
made  on  his  memory,  he  could  not  believe  that  the 
conversation  had  lasted  less  than  three  quarters  of 
an  hour.  And  this  view  is  incidentally  favored 
by  his  remark  to  Dr.  Russell  that  the  house  was 
not  clean^  and  that  chairs  were  brought  outside. 
If  the  room  was  so  untidy  that  they  would  not 
remain  in  it,  it  is  in  the  highest  degree  improb- 
able that  they  waited  three  quarters  of  an  hour 
before  leaving  it. 

But  the  truth  of  the  matter  seems  to  be  that 
Bismarck  has  added  together  the  time  spent  in  the 
house  and  that  passed  outside.  With  the  excep- 
tion of  the  remark  made  to  Dr.  Russell  which  has 
just  been  quoted,  he  makes  no  allusion  to  any  out- 
of-door  conversation,  or  to  any  opportunity  for  one 
which  could  have  lasted  more  than  a  very  short  time. 
Leaving  out  that  remark,  we  get  the  impression 
from  his  words  that  his  business  with  Napoleon 
was  transacted  in  one  uninterrupted  interview, 
which  was  held  within  the  cottage  and  lasted  from 
forty-five  minutes  to  nearly  an  hour.  This  agrees 
well,  so  far  as  the  length  of  the  whole  interview  is 
concerned,  with  Forbes,  whose  figures  are  :  nearly 
ten  minutes  within  and  nearly  an  hour  without. 
Nor  does  it  differ  materially  from  Sheridan's  esti- 
mate :  a  quarter  of  an  hour  within  and  fully  an 
hour  without.  It  may  well  be  that  so  unimportant 
an  incident  as  a  slight  change  in  the  scene  of  the 
interview  soon  passed  from  Bismarck's  memory. 


A  STUDY  OF  HUMAN  TESTIMONY        155 

The  discrepancy  in  regard  to  Bismarck's  ges- 
tures we  may  promptly  dismiss,  and  may  confi- 
dently assume  that  Forbes  is  right ;  for  a  man  is 
generally  ignorant  of  his  own  mannerisms,  and 
Bismarck's  declaration  that  "  he  has  no  such  trick  " 
cannot  weigh  against  what  Forbes  states  that  he 
actually  saw.  And  for  a  somewhat  similar  reason 
we  may  disregard  the  Count's  denial  that  he  used 
the  German  language.  A  man  who  is  accustomed 
to  converse  in  two  tongues  might  easily  forget 
which  one  he  used  on  a  given  occasion.  Madame 
Fournaise's  testimony  is  unequivocal :  he  used 
German  inside  and  she  caught  a  word  now  and 
then.  The  weaver  is  no  less  clear  :  they  spoke 
German  outside  by  an  agreement  which  he  over- 
heard, and  consequently  he  could  not  understand 
the  conversation.  Bismarck  admits  that  he  did 
use  that  tongue,  but  says  it  was  when  he  addressed 
the  inmates  of  the  cottage.  The  remark  which 
the  weaver  heard  the  Emperor  make  outside,  "  Let 
us  talk  in  German,"  would  favor  either  view.  It 
might  imply  that  they  had  been  using  the  French 
tongue  inside  and  that  the  Emperor  wished  to 
change  it,  or  that  they  had  been  speaking  German 
and  he  wished  to  continue  it.  Bismarck  seems  to 
believe  that  the  whole  negotiation  was  conducted 
in  French  ;  but  unless  we  are  ready  to  adopt  the 
improbable  view  that  both  the  weaver  and  his  wife 
made  independently  the  same  mistake,  we  must  be- 
lieve that  either  the  business  that  was  transacted 
in  the  house  or  that  which  was  arranged  outside 


156    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

was  clone  in  German ;  and  as  Bismarck  seems  to 
have  forgotten  that  the  interview  was  divided,  it 
is  decidedly  the  more  probable  that  the  same 
language  was  used  throughout. 

Thus  far  we  have  had,  comparatively  speaking, 
plain  sailing,  and  by  using  only  reasonable  suppo- 
sitions have  woven  the  narratives  of  the  different 
witnesses  into  a  sufficiently  consistent  account; 
but  now  we  have  to  deal  with  statements  of  the 
weaver's  wife  which  throw  everything  into  con- 
fusion. She  virtually  declares  that  there  was  no 
interview  outside  of  the  house ;  for  after  a  conver- 
sation of  fifteen  minutes  in  the  room,  Bismarck 
came  clattering  out  with  an  ill-humored  visage 
and,  mounting  his  horse,  rode  o&.  She  could  have 
no  doubt  as  to  this  incident,  for  she  warned  him 
that  the  stairs  were  dangerous ;  but  he  hurried 
down,  nevertheless,  so  precipitately  as  to  attract 
her  attention  —  "  like  a  man  of  twenty,"  she  said. 
Moreover,  there  would  seem  to  be  no  ground  for 
the  suspicion  that  she  had  forgotten  that  the 
Emperor  was  with  him  at  the  time,  or  that,  re- 
membering it,  she  had  neglected  to  mention  the 
circumstance,  for  she  found  the  former  afterwards 
in  the  room  with  his  face  buried  in  his  hands.  Her 
recollection  of  this  fact  was  so  definite  that  she 
even  recalled  a  conversation  she  had  had  with  him 
and  an  act  of  kindly  service  that  she  had  rendered 
him.  She  supposed,  too,  that  he  had  remained 
there  some  thirty  minutes,  for  she  says  that  in 
about  half  an  hour  Bismarck  returned  in  full  dress 
and  preceded  the  Emperor  downstairs. 


A  STUDY  OF  HUMAN  TESTIMONY        157 

One  almost  despairs  of  fitting  these  incidents 
anywhere  into  the  account.  If  we  were  at  hberty 
to  assume  that  the  Emperor  did  not  follow  Bis- 
marck out-of-doors  until  after  some  little  interval 
of  time,  we  might  plausibly  surmise  that  the  brief 
conversation  between  Napoleon  and  the  woman 
occurred  during  that  interval,  that  the  interview 
outside  she  had  not  observed,  that  the  Count's  de- 
parture took  place  consequently  in  her  memory  as 
a  continuation  of  his  descent  after  the  fifteen-min- 
ute interview,  and  that  the  detail  of  his  preceding 
the  Emperor  downstairs  afterwards  belongs  also 
to  that  interview,  and  is  a  reminiscence  of  the  sug- 
gested fact  that  there  had  been  some  little  space 
between  the  descent  of  the  Chancellor  and  that 
of  the  Emperor.  Indeed,  Forbes  says  the  former 
was  a  few  moments  in  advance.  So,  too,  in  one  of 
the  accounts  it  is  stated  that  chairs  were  brought 
out.  Had  the  Emperor  remained  behind  while 
this  was  being  done  ?  If  it  was  but  for  half  a 
minute,  there  would  have  been  time  enough  for  the 
conversation  with  Madame  Fournaise.  But  what 
is  to  be  done  with  her  obvious  implication  that  he 
remained  there  above  half  an  hour,  and  with  the 
fact  that  his  direction  to  her  regarding  the  blinds 
shows  that  he  expected  to  stay  some  time?  Her 
story  is  stated  to  have  been  told  "  wliile  the  events 
were  fresh  in  her  memory."  Still,  she  had  forgot- 
ten the  interview  out-of-doors ;  or,  if  she  knew  no- 
thing about  it,  she  had  failed  to  remember  that  the 
time  it  lasted  had  intervened  between  Bismarck's 


158    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

descent  from  tlie  first  floor  and  his  departure.  Did 
she  unwittingly  add  that  time  to  the  minute  or  less 
which  the  Emperor  might  conceivably  have  spent 
in  the  room  after  Bismarck  left  it?  And  was  her 
association  of  the  Chancellor  in  full  dress  with  the 
descent  of  the  Emperor  a  confusion  of  two  chrono- 
logically separate  incidents?  We  should  suppose, 
though  we  cannot  be  sure,  that  Napoleon's  pathetic 
remark  to  her  and  the  incident  of  the  coins  would 
have  aided  her  recollection  in  this  matter. 

Or  is  there  a  hiatus  in  Forbes's  narrative  ?  Did 
Napoleon  enter  that  room  twice  ?  There  are  at 
least  twenty  minutes  during  which  he  disappears 
from  the  account.  He  came  out  of  the  house  at 
7.20,  says  Forbes,  and  had  an  outdoor  conversation 
which  lasted  nearly  an  hour.  That  is,  it  was  fin- 
ished before  8.20.  Bismarck  took  his  departure  at 
8.40,  and  Napoleon  was  then  outside.  He  paced 
to  and  fro,  smoking,  or  sat  with  the  officers,  till 
9.15,  when  he  was  formally  put  under  guard.  But 
where  was  he  from  8.20  or  a  little  earlier  till  8.40  ? 
The  witnesses  do  not  say.  Did  he  return  unob- 
served to  the  room  and  remain  there  during  that 
time  ?  Did  the  weaver's  wife  then  find  him  there 
and  take  for  granted  that  he  had  not  been  out  of 
the  chamber  ?  In  her  narrative  she  does  not  say 
or  even  necessarily  imply  that  she  went  into  the 
apartment  as  soon  as  Bismarck  left  it.  Forbes  says : 
"  WTien  she  entered  the  room  in  which  the  Emperor 
was  left,  she  found  him,"  etc.  If,  then,  it  is  sup- 
posable  that  the  Emperor  eluded  the  observation 


A  STUDY  OF  HUMAN  TESTIMONY        159 

of  Forbes  long  enough  to  enter  the  house  a  second 
time  and  spend  twenty  minutes  there,  that  Madame 
Fournaise,  finding  him  there  and  knowing  nothing 
of  the  interview  outside,  thought  he  had  been  there 
ever  since  he  first  came  in,  there  is  nothing  in  her 
testimony  inconsistent  with  what  is  affirmed  by 
the  other  witnesses  except  that  she  believed  that 
Bismarck  had  ridden  away  immediately  after  leav- 
ing the  chamber,  and  that  he  was  in  full  dress 
when  he  preceded  the  Emperor  downstairs. 

I  have  been  at  so  much  pains  to  analyze  and 
reconcile  this  mass  of  testimony  in  order  to  call 
attention  the  more  forcibly  to  the  difficidties  sure 
to  be  encountered  in  sifting  the  evidence  for  any 
complex  event.  It  probably  will  be  conceded  that 
a  larger  measure  of  agreement  among  witnesses 
than  appears  in  the  above  accounts  is  not  to  be 
expected  in  the  narratives  of  an  occurrence  which 
involves  the  movements  of  an  equal  number  of 
persons.  We  may  even  go  further  and  confidently 
affirm,  in  view  of  the  eminent  character  of  those 
whose  statements  have  just  been  examined,  that 
the  discrepancies  in  these  are  abnormally  few  in 
number  and  unusually  slight  in  importance.  A 
larger,  or  even  so  large,  a  degree  of  correspondence 
cannot  as  a  rule  reasonably  be  looked  for  in  the 
accounts  of  an  equally  complicated  incident  given 
by  the  same  number  of  persons.  If  the  proof  of 
the  surrender  of  Louis  Napoleon  should  eventu- 
ally consist  solely  of  the  testimony  given  above, 
the  difficulty  with  which  the  various  narratives  are 


IGO    THE  KATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

harmonized  would  constitute  no  valid  reason  for 
doubting  tlie  occurrence.  And,  therefore,  seeming 
contradictions  among  the  witnesses  to  any  other 
event  of  a  like  intricacy,  if  they  are  of  no  greater 
proportionate  number  and  difficulty,  cannot  ra- 
tionally be  urged  against  the  credibility  of  the 
event.  This,  of  course,  may  be  assailed  on  other 
groimds;  but  discrepancies  in  the  accounts,  if 
they  are  no  more  serious  or  striking  than  those 
enumerated  above,  have  no  weight  whatever,  for 
they  reflect  only  the  normal  character  of  human 
testimony,  and  are  inseparable  from  it. 

Now,  applying  this  principle  —  which  I  believe 
to  be  incontestable  —  to  the  evidence  for  the  re- 
surrection of  Christ,  it  becomes  manifest  that  the 
alleged  disagreements  among  the  reporters  of  that 
occurrence  are  less  serious  and  important  than 
those  examined  above.  And  even  if  we  accept 
the  latter  as  representing  with  sufficient  accuracy 
only  the  normal  amount  of  variation  which  is  to 
be  expected  in  human  testimony  in  a  parallel  case, 
the  discrepancies  in  the  accounts  of  the  resurrec- 
tion are  fewer  in  nmnber  than  was  to  have  been 
anticipated ;  nor  would  the  credibility  of  the 
event  have  been  impaired  even  if  they  had  been 
somewhat  more  numerous  and  difficult.  Such  as 
they  are,  they  furnish  no  more  reason  to  doubt  that 
it  occurred  than  those  above  cited  would  afford 
twenty  centuries  from  now  for  questioning  the  tra- 
ditional account  of  Louis  Napoleon's  surrender. 

It  may  be  worth  while  for  us  to  examine  them 
in  detail  with  the  above-mentioned  fact  in  mind. 


A  STUDY  OF  HUMAN  TESTIMONY        161 

The  persons  whose  movements  or  words  are 
chronicled  are  the  risen  Saviour,  Mary  Magdalene, 
"the  other  Mary"  (Matthew),  Salome  (Mark), 
Joanna  and  other  women  unnamed  (Luke),  the 
guard  at  the  tomb,  Peter,  John,  and  two  men  in 
dazzling  apparel.  The  witnesses  are  Matthew, 
Mark,  Luke,  John,  Paul,  and  the  author  of  the 
Appendix  to  Mark.  We  have  thus  an  event  of 
startling  magnitude,  involving  the  movements  of 
more  persons  than  are  concerned  in  the  narrative 
of  Napoleon's  surrender,  and  related,  like  that,  by 
four  principal  reporters  and  by  others  whose  tes- 
timony is  briefer.  Is  it  as  easy  to  reconcile  the 
discrepancies  in  this  account  as  in  the  other  ?  If 
so,  they  cannot  of  themselves  be  said  to  cast  any 
shadow  of  suspicion  on  the  general  veracity  of  the 
narrative. 

They  may  be  best  brought  out  by  following  each 
detail  of  the  story  through  the  parallel  accounts. 

1.  The  Women  who  came  to  the  Tomb.  — 
Matthew  says  there  were  two,  whom  he  names ; 
Mark  that  there  were  those  two  and  another ; 
Luke,  those  two,  another  who  was  not  the  third 
one  mentioned  by  Mark,  and  still  others  whose 
names  he  does  not  give.  John  mentions  only 
Mary  Magdalene,  agreeing,  in  this  regard,  with  the 
Appendix. 

Now,  in  no  case  is  it  expressly  affirmed  in  any 
of  the  accounts  that  no  women  were  present  ex- 
cept those  mentioned  by  the  writer  ;  nor,  indeed,  is 
it  even  necessarily  implied  that  such  was  the  fact, 


162    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

except  in  John's  account  of  tlie  interview  of  Jesus 
with  Mary  Magdalene.  There  is,  in  one  case,  a 
distinct  intimation  to  the  contrary.  For  example, 
the  Fourth  Gospel  says  that  Mary  Magdalene  came 
to  the  tomb  (the  first  time),  but  mentions  no  com- 
panion ;  yet  when  she  makes  her  report  to  Peter 
and  Jolm  immediately  after  she  sa3^s,^  "  They  have 
taken  away  the  Lord  out  of  the  tomb,  and  we  know 
not  Q>vK  otSa/Acv)  where  they  have  laid  him,"  —  a 
hint  that  the  evangelist  was  aware  that  there  had 
been  at  least  one  other  with  her.  It  is  to  be  noted 
that  we  have  no  such  difficulties  in  this  connection 
as  are  created  by  General  Sheridan's  persistent  de- 
nial that  there  were  any  officers  in  the  carriage  but 
the  two  whom  he  mentioned.  The  discrepancies, 
if  they  can  be  so  called,  are  rather  to  be  classed 
with  his  failure  to  mention  the  three  mounted  offi- 
cers who 'undoubtedly  followed  the  Emperor. 

2.  The  Time  of  their  Arrival.  —  Matthew 
says  they  came  "  as  it  began  to  dawn."  Mark : 
"  very  early,"  "  when  the  sun  was  risen."  Luke : 
"  at  early  dawn."  John  :  "  early,  while  it  was  yet 
dark"  (i,  e.,  Mary  Magdalene).  Now  the  expres- 
sions used  by  three  of  the  evangelists  are  substan- 
tially harmonious,  and  the  Appendix  is  not  incon- 
sistent with  them.  Mark's  specification,  however, 
"  when  the  sun  was  risen,"  is  a  discrepancy ;  but 
it  no  more  disagrees  with  the  others  than  it  does 
with  his  own  designation  of  the  time  as  "  very 
early."     The  real  difficulty,  therefore,  is  not  to 

1  John  XX,  2. 


A  STUDY  OF  HUMAN   TESTIMONY        163 

harmonize  Mark  with  the  others,  but  to  determine 
just  what  he  means.  The  fact  that  the  two  dis- 
crepant notes  of  time  occur  in  the  same  sentence 
precludes  all  suspicion  that  they  were  not  both  in- 
tentionally used.  A  plausible  explanation  would 
be  that  some  of  the  women  reached  the  tomb  later 
than  others,  and  that  Mark  has  preserved  a  remi- 
niscence of  that  fact.  His  ambiguity,  however,  re- 
moves liis  statement  from  the  list  of  discrepancies 
which  can  be  confidently  pronounced  to  be  such. 

3.  The  Earthquake  and  the  Guard.  —  Mat- 
thew seems  to  imply  that  the  earthquake  took 
place  while  the  women  were  at  the  tomb,  that  they 
saw  the  angel  roll  away  the  stone,  that  the  guard 
were  present  during  their  conversation  with  him, 
and  that  it  took  place  outside  the  tomb  ("  Come^  see 
the  place  where  the  Lord  lay,"  xxviii.  6),  while  he 
was  sitting  on  the  stone.  Mark  says  the  women 
found  the  stone  rolled  away,  and  that  they  had  a 
conversation  with  a  young  man  in  a  white  robe  in 
the  sepulchre.  Luke  also  says  that  they  found 
the  stone  removed,  and  that  while  they  stood  per- 
plexed, apparently  within  the  tomb,  two  men  stood 
by  them  in  dazzling  apparel  and  spoke  to  them. 
John  records  that  Mary  Magdalene  found  the 
stone  taken  away,  but  mentions  no  angels  until 
her  second  visit,  when  she  saw  two.  In  none  of 
the  accounts  except  that  of  Matthew  is  the  earth- 
quake mentioned,  or  the  impression  given  that  the 
soldiers  were  at  the  grave  when  the  women  arrived. 

If  the  First  Gospel  reaUy  necessitates  the  con- 


164    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

elusion  tliat  the  moving  of  the  stone  was  conceived 
by  Matthew  to  have  occurred  after  the  women  had 
reached  the  tomb,  and  that  their  interview  with  the 
angel  was  held  in  the  presence  of  the  cowering 
guard,  this  account  is  evidently  not  in  agreement 
with  any  of  the  others.  And  that  such  was  Mat- 
thew's understanding  of  the  facts  finds  counte- 
nance in  the  emphasis  placed  by  the  angel  on  the 
personal  pronoun,  "  Fear  not  ye "  (M  ff^ofSeiaOe 
v/xcts),  which  suggests  a  tacit  reference  to  others 
present  who  were  in  fear.  In  that  case  the  evan- 
gehst  may  have  welded  together  two  sets  of  inci- 
dents by  ignoring  the  interval  of  time  which  sepa- 
rated them,  —  an  error  which  would  be  comparable 
with  the  omission  by  Madame  Fournaise  of  the 
outdoor  interview,  and  by  Bismarck,  in  one  of  his 
accounts,  of  the  change  in  the  scene  of  the  conver- 
sation from  the  inside  to  the  outside  of  the  cottage, 
with  the  result,  in  both  cases,  that  disconnected 
events  were  run  together.  The  failure  of  the  other 
evangehsts  to  mention  the  earthquake  and  the 
terror  of  the  soldiers  would  constitute  no  disagree- 
ment, but  would  simply  indicate  that  the  First 
Gospel  begins  with  a  detail  which  belongs  to  a  little 
earlier  point  of  time  than  that  at  which  the  others 
commence. 

4.  The  Angels.  —  Matthew,  as  has  been  said, 
seems  to  have  supposed  that  the  women  talked  with 
a  single  angel  outside  the  tomb,  Mark  differing 
only  by  assigning  the  conversation  to  the  interior. 
The  words  used  by  the  apparition  in  the  two  ac- 


A  STUDY  OF  HUMAN  TESTIMONY        165 

counts  show  the  incident  to  be  one  and  the  same. 
Luke,  however,  says  two  men  stood  by  them, 
though  evidently  a  little  later,  i.  e.,  "  while  they 
stood  perplexed."  John  mentions  none  in  connec- 
tion with  Mary  Magdalene's  first  visit,  but  speci- 
fies two  when  she  came  the  second  time,  —  a  differ- 
ent event  altogether. 

There  is  really  no  contradiction  here  ;  for  not 
only  does  the  smaller  number  not  necessarily  ex- 
clude the  larger,  as  shown  in  the  example  above, 
but  it  is  quite  conceivable  that  one  of  the  mysteri- 
ous visitors  may  have  been  seen  by  some  of  the  party 
who  were  not  present  when  the  other  appeared. 

A  more  serious  difficulty  is  created  by  the  fact 
that  while  Matthew,  Mark,  and  Luke  convey  the  im- 
pression that  Mary  Magdalene  was  one  of  those  to 
whom  the  angel  or  angels  fbst  appeared,  John  con- 
strains us  to  believe  that  she  was  not.  According 
to  his  account,  when  she  saw  that  the  stone  had 
been  taken  away,  she  came  running  to  Peter  and 
John  with  the  words,  "  They  have  taken  away  the 
Lord  out  of  the  tomb,  and  we  know  not  where  they 
have  laid  him."  No  hint  here  of  a  resurrection 
reported  by  angel  visitors.  So,  too,  when  she  re- 
turned to  the  grave  and  saw  the  two  figures  in  white 
sitting  within,  she  seems  not  to  have  surmised  their 
true  nature.  At  any  rate,  if  she  had  seen  them 
and  heard  their  message  on  a  previous  occasion,  she 
must  have  known  what  explanation  they  had  given 
of  the  disappearance  of  the  body,  and  would  hardly 
have  answered  their  question,  as  she  did,  by  ex- 


166    THE   RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

pressing  ignorance  of  what  tliey  had  already  told 
her. 

The  discrepancy,  however,  may  be  plausibly 
explained  by  supposing  John's  narrative  to  con- 
tain an  accurate  version  of  an  incident  which  the 
other  evangelists  relate  more  loosely.  It  is  quite 
credible  that  they,  knowing  that  Mary  Magdalene 
had  been  among  the  first  at  the  tomb,  took  for 
granted  that  she  was  present  at  the  first  interview 
with  the  angels,  when,  in  point  of  fact,  she  left  her 
companions  as  soon  as  she  saw  that  the  stone  had 
been  moved,  and  was  not  present  when  that  inter- 
view took  place,  probably  within  the  tomb.  Her 
separation  from  the  party  would  have  been  an  in- 
cident of  so  little  importance  that  it  might  well 
have  escaped  the  notice  of  authors  who  may  have 
cared  only  to  give  a  general  outline  of  events  with- 
out troubling  themselves  about  such  minute  details. 
It  was  an  occurrence  that  might  well  have  been 
overlooked  in  an  account  involving  the  movements 
of  an  ever-changing  group  of  persons,  and  has  its 
counterpart  in  the  possible  fact  suggested  above, — 
that  the  Emperor  Napoleon  had  entered  the  cot- 
tage a  second  time  and  was  within  doors  during  a 
part  of  the  time  that  Archibald  Forbes  supposed 
he  was  outside. 

5.  The  Words  of  the  Angels.  — Matthew  and 
Mark  are  here  in  substantial  ag-reement.  Luke's 
report  also  is  of  the  same  general  tenor.  His  most 
important  divergence  is  his  expansion  of  Mat- 
thew's,  "  He  is  risen,  as  he   said  "  into,   he  "  is 


A  STUDY  OF  HUMAN  TESTIMONY        167 

risen :  remember  liow  lie  spake  unto  you  when  he 
was  yet  in  GaHlee,  saying  that  the  Son  of  man 
must  be  delivered  up  into  the  hands  of  sinful  men, 
and  be  crucified,  and  the  third  day  rise  again." 
In  other  words,  he  quotes  the  saying  referred  to  by 
Matthew.  This  may  be,  as  some  sujjpose,  of  the 
nature  of  an  editorial  amplification.  Or  does  Luke 
report  a  speech  which  was  addressed  to  a  second 
party  of  the  women  ?  The  true  reading  of  Luke 
xxiv.  8-10  ("  And  they  remembered  his  words, 
and  returned  from  the  tomb,  and  told  all  these 
things  to  the  eleven,  and  to  all  the  rest.  Now  they 
were  Mary  Magdalene,  and  Joanna,  and  Mary  the 
mother  of  James :  and  the  other  women  with  them 
told  these  things  unto  the  apostles  ")  would  lend 
some  color  to  the  suspicion  that  the  angels  spoke 
to  two  different  groups  of  auditors,  who  reported 
to  the  disciples  in  quick  succession.  The  fact  that 
Luke  alone  preserves  the  impressive  interrogatory, 
"  Why  seek  ye  among  the  dead  him  that  liveth  ?  " 
would  harmonize  with  that  idea ;  though  it  could 
not,  in  any  event,  be  regarded  as  a  disagreement. 
It  might  be  merely  an  additional  detail  which  the 
other  writers  had  forgotten,  and  would  be  compar- 
able with  the  fact,  preserved  by  Madame  Fournaise 
alone,  that  the  Emperor  entered  the  cottage  be- 
cause he  was  unwilling  to  pass  through  the  Ger- 
man soldiers.  The  allusion  to  Galilee  has  a  differ- 
ent setting  in  all  three  accounts.  So  the  words, 
"  I  have  told  you,"  in  Matthew,  and  "  as  he  said 
unto  you,"  in  Mark,  seem   to  be  —  especially  in 


168    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

the  Greek  —  different  reminiscences  of  the  same 
remark  ;  but  such  discrepancies  affect  no  important 
fact  and  are  of  no  account. 

6.  The  Women  and  the  Disciples.  —  Matthew 
says  that  they,  the  two  Marys,  ran  to  bring  the 
disciples  word,  but  leaves  us  nothing  more  than  a 
presumption  that  they  carried  out  their  purpose. 
Mark  reports  that  they  and  another  were  directed 
by  the  angel  to  make  known  to  the  disciples  what 
had  occurred,  but  that  they  said  nothing  to  any 
one,  being  afraid.  What  modifying  statements,  if 
any,  followed,  of  course  we  do  not  know ;  but,  as  it 
stands,  the  Second  Gospel  gives  us  to  understand 
that  they  made  no  report.  If,  therefore,  Matthew 
and  Mark  contained  all  the  information  we  have  on 
this  point,  we  could  not  be  certain  that  there  was 
any  disagreement  between  them.  Luke,  however, 
makes  it  clear  that  of  the  five  or  more  women  intro- 
duced into  his  account  some  at  least  delivered  their 
message.    Jolm  and  the  Appendix  omit  the  episode. 

We  cannot  state  very  positively  that  there  is 
any  actual  discrepancy  here,  because  the  only  re- 
cord which  suggests  one  is  mutilated  at  a  critical 
place.  It  does  not  seem  quite  probable  that  Mark's 
account,  if  we  had  the  whole  of  it,  would  favor  the 
idea  that  aU  the  women  disobeyed  the  command  of 
the  angel  for  any  great  length  of  time.  We  can 
only  be  sure,  under  the  circumstances,  that  Mark 
would  have  us  believe  that  they  or  those  of  them 
whom  he  had  in  mind  at  first  told  nobody. 

7.  The  First  Appearance  of  the  Risen  Saviour. 


A  STUDY  OF  HUMAN  TESTIMONY        169 

—  Matthew,  the  Appendix,  and  John  agree  that  it 
was  to  Mary  Magdalene.  Paul  mentions  no  ap- 
pearances to  any  women,  harmonizing  in  this  par- 
ticular with  Luke,  who  records  fii'st  the  appearance 
to  Cleopas  and  his  companion,  though  leaving  it 
doubtful  whether  there  had  not  been  an  earlier  one 
to  Peter  (xxiv.  34).  Paul  also  mentions  Cephas 
(Peter)  first  in  his  list  of  those  who  had  beheld  the 
risen  Christ ;  but  neither  he  nor  Luke  expressly 
states  that  Mary  Magdalene  had  not  seen  him  first. 
Now  whether  we  should  be  justified  in  suspecting 
that  the  two  wi-iters  last  named  had  reason  to  be- 
lieve that  an  appearance  of  the  risen  Saviour  to  a 
woman  would  not  be  likely  to  impress  favorably 
their  Gentile  readers,  may  be  doubtful ;  but  it  is 
very  evident  that  their  failure  to  mention  it  can- 
not be  cited  as  proof  that  they  were  ignorant  of  it. 
It  cannot  confidently  be  classed,  therefore,  as  a 
disagreement  with  other  accounts. 

The  only  real  discrepancies,  then,  in  this  connec- 
tion, would  seem  to  be  Matthew's  supposition  that 
Jesus  met  Mary  Magdalene  as  she  was  returning 
from  her  first  visit  to  the  sepulchre,  and  that  the 
other  Mary  was  with  her  at  the  time.  That  she  was 
alone  and  was  making  a  second  visit  to  the  tomb 
when  she  first  saw  the  risen  Lord,  John  makes  suffi- 
ciently probable.  She  speaks  in  the  singular  num- 
ber, not  in  the  plural,  as  on  the  previous  occasion, 
when  we  may  suppose  that  she  had  the  other  Mary 
in  mind.  This  error  of  Matthew,  then,  would  be  of 
the  same  order  as  the  one  already  attributed  to  him, 


170    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

and  would  be  simply  another  illustration  of  a  tend- 
ency to  ignore  dividing-lines  between  events. 

But  admitting  that  the  interviews  of  Jesus  with 
the  two  Marys  in  the  First  Gospel  and  with  Mary 
Magdalene  in  the  Fourth  are  the  same  incident, 
it  might  be  thought  that  there  is  a  contradiction 
between  the  two  accounts  in  another  particular. 
Matthew  says,  "  They  [the  two]  came  and  took  hold 
of  his  feet,  and  worshipped  him;"  but  Christ's 
remark  to  Mary  Magdalene  in  the  Fourth  Gospel, 
"  Touch  me  not,  for  I  am  not  yet  ascended  unto 
the  Father,"  is  commonly  supposed  to  intimate 
that  she  was  not  permitted  to  lay  hands  on  him 
at  all.  But  it  is  doubtful  if  the  Greek  favors, 
or  at  any  rate  necessitates,  this  view.  We  should 
expect  in  that  case  an  aorist,  —  i^rj  ^ov  aij/rj,  per- 
haps (Colossians  ii.  21).  But  the  direction  is  in 
the  present  tense  (/xtJ  fxov  oltttov'),  and  might  be  ren- 
dered, "  Do  not  be  handling  me."  The  grammat- 
ical construction  is  such  as  would  be  likely  to  be 
used  if  Jesus  would  deter  Mary  from  continuing 
to  do  what  she  had  begun  to  do,  as  may  be  gath- 
ered from  such  examples  as  "  Fear  not "  (Luke  i. 
13),  "  Trouble  not  yourselves  "  (Acts  xx.  10),  and 
others.  Christ's  command,  when  thus  conceived, 
is  not  inconsistent  with  the  parallel  passage  in 
Matthew,  but  presupposes  some  such  action  on  the 
part  of  Mary  Magdalene  as  is  there  attributed  to 
the  two  Marys.  Aside  from  the  number  of  the 
women  supposed  to  be  concerned,  there  is,  then,  no 
disagreement  between  the  accounts  except  that  in 


A  STUDY  OF  HUMAN  TESTIMONY        171 

one  Jesus  says,  "  All  hail ! "  (xai/aerc)  and  in  the 
other  simply  "  Mary,"  which  is  of  no  importance. 

8.  Peter  and  John.  —  The  only  important  vari- 
ation in  the  narratives  of  the  conduct  of  these 
two  disciples  is  in  the  fact  that  Luke  states  that 
Peter  went  to  the  tomb  and  mentions  no  compan- 
ion, while  John  says  that  he  and  Peter  went  to- 
gether. But  it  seems  evident  enough  that  Luke 
knew  that  Peter  was  not  alone,  for  he  represents 
Cleopas  and  his  companion  as  saying,  "  And  cer- 
tain (rtves,  plural)  of  them  that  were  with  us  went 
to  the  tomb,"  etc.  (xxiv.  24).  Even  if  the  omis- 
sion had  been  made  by  the  evangelist  from  igno- 
rance, it  would  have  been  of  no  consequence. 

It  will  not  be  necessary  to  compare  the  accounts 
of  all  the  other  appearances.  They  create  no  diffi- 
culty, except  that  in  Matthew's  account  of  an 
appearance  to  the  eleven  the  remark,  "  but  some 
doubted,"  might  seem  inconsistent  with  the  fact 
that  earlier  appearances  to  the  eleven  are  men- 
tioned by  other  evangelists  which  might  be  sup- 
posed to  have  removed  the  possibility  of  doubt. 
But  this  clause  may  be  a  reminiscence  of  Thomas's 
doubts,  or  of  Mark  xvi.  14,  in  which  case  the 
error  of  the  evangelist  was  in  supposing  that  Gal- 
ilee rather  than  Jerusalem  was  the  scene  of  the 
incident.  Such  a  mistake  would  have  an  impor- 
tant bearing  on  the  question  of  authorship,  but 
would  be  insignificant  in  other  respects.  Or,  is  it 
possible  that  the  interview  Matthew  had  in  mind 
was  the  one  with  the  five  hundred  brethren  wliicli 


172    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF   ORTHODOXY 

is  mentioned  by  Paul  ?  Alford  shows  that  in  the 
Greek  the  phrase  "  but  some  doubted "  does  not 
necessarily  mean  some  of  the  eleven. 

Now  it  will  have  been  observed  that  all  of  these 
discrepancies  relate  to  subordinate  details  of  the 
narrative  and  affect  no  important  fact.  Moreover, 
it  is  possible  to  disentangle  the  seemingly  conflict- 
ing statements  and,  without  resorting  to  any  im- 
probable hypotheses,  to  weave  them  into  a  rea- 
sonable and  self-consistent  whole.  The  order  of 
events,  then,  might  be  supposed  to  have  been  about 
as  follows :  — 

The  angel  rolls  away  the  stone  in  sight  of  the 
guard,  who  fall  to  the  earth  in  terror  and  then, 
after  he  enters  the  tomb,  perhaps,  desert  their 
posts  in  a  panic. 

At  that  time  the  women,  in  two  or  three  bands, 
were  on  their  way  to  the  sepulchre,  Matthew  erro- 
neously supposing  that  one  of  the  groups  had 
arrived  early  enough  to  witness  the  above  incident. 

The  first  who  reached  the  ground  were  Mary 
Magdalene  and  at  least  one  companion.  She  goes 
near  enough  to  see  that  the  grave  has  been  opened 
and  that  the  body  is  not  there,  and  then  hastens 
back  to  inform  the  disciples,  without  having  seen 
the  mysterious  visitor  within  the  tomb. 

Another  party  arrive  and  enter  the  grave,  see 
the  angel  and  hear  his  words,  and  also  hurry  away 
to  notify  the  disciples.  They  are  hardly  gone 
when  perhaps  a  third  party  reach  the  ground,  find 
two  angels  now  in  the  sepulchre,  receive  a  com- 


A  STUDY  OF  HUMAN  TESTIMONY        173 

munication  substantially  the  same  as  had  been 
made  to  their  predecessors,  and,  in  their  turn,  flee 
to  the  city. 

Mary  Magdalene  meanwhile  reports  to  the  dis- 
ciples that  the  body  is  gone.  Peter  and  John  start 
at  once  for  the  grave,  Mary  following  them.  The 
other  women  had  not  yet  arrived  with  their  story 
of  the  apparitions,  as  I  infer  from  the  remark  made 
in  reference  to  the  two  disciples  after  they  had 
found  the  tomb  empty :  "  For  as  yet  they  knew 
not  the  scripture,  that  he  must  rise  again  from 
the  dead."  (John  xx.  9.)  This  statement  would 
hardly  have  been  made  if  they  had  received  the 
message  of  the  angels.  Having  found  that  the 
body  was  really  gone,  they  return  home. 

Meanwhile  the  other  women  have  made  their  re- 
port to  the  rest  of  the  disciples,  —  though  some  may 
have  fled  to  their  homes  too  frightened  to  tell  what 
they  had  seen ;  but  their  hearers  are  incredulous. 

Mary  Magdalene  reaches  the  grave  after  the 
two  disciples  are  gone,  having  been  unable  to  keep 
up  with  them.  She  sees  two  white  figures  within, 
but  having  heard  of  no  apparitions,  she  does  not 
seem  to  have  divined  their  true  character.  She 
turns,  recognizes  Jesus,  seizes  him  by  the  feet  in 
worship,  is  checked  by  him,  and  is  sent  with  a 
message  to  the  disciples,  which  Cleopas  and  his 
companion  do  not  hear,  having  left  the  city  imme- 
diately after  the  return  of  the  other  women. 

It  would  thus  appear  that  throughout  this  whole 
involved  narrative  there  are  no  discrepancies  which 


174    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

cannot  be  removed  by  suppositions  wbicb  a  famil- 
iarity with  tbe  normal  character  of  human  testi- 
mony will  show  to  be  both  natural  and  reasonable. 
A  tendency  to  concatenate  separate  events,  fail- 
ures to  keep  track  of  the  units  of  an  ever-changing 
company,  and,  as  a  result,  erroneous  groupings  of 
its  members  on  various  occasions,  a  concentration 
of  the  attention  on  the  movements  of  one  or  two 
individuals  to  the  exclusion  of  all  others  present, 
ascriptions  of  acts  to  a  whole  class  of  persons  which 
were  done  by  only  a  portion  of  them,  specifications 
of  time  in  connection  with  one  stage  of  a  some- 
what protracted  event  which  belong  to  a  different 
one,  —  these  are  common  characteristics  of  human 
testimony.  They  are  to  be  expected  in  reports  of 
every  intricate  event,  and  afford  in  themselves  no 
reason  for  doubting  that  it  took  place.  It  is  easier 
to  reconcile  the  conflicting  testimony  for  the  resur- 
rection of  Christ  than  it  is  to  perform  a  similar 
operation  on  the  evidence  collated  by  Archibald 
Forbes  in  regard  to  the  surrender  of  the  Em- 
peror Napoleon.  There  is  no  step  in  the  whole 
process  that  is  attended  with  so  much  difficulty  as 
is  inseparable  from  any  attempt  to  intercalate 
Madame  Fournaise's  precise  recollection  of  her  first 
conversation  with  him  into  the  narratives  of  the 
other  witnesses.  And  the  report  of  that  surrender 
which  will  go  down  to  posterity  wiU  rest  upon  a 
somewhat  artificial  and  suspicious  adjustment  of  di- 
vergent accounts,  which  can  hardly  be  affirmed  with 
truth  of  the  story  of  the  resurrection  of  Christ. 


CHAPTER  VII 

INSPIRATION 

If  we  are  justified  in  regarding  the  resurrection 
of  Christ  as  an  historical  event,  we  are  compelled 
to  adopt  one  conclusion  of  no  little  importance. 
It  will  be  impossible  for  us  to  escape  the  convic- 
tion that  God  has  provided  some  way  of  acquaint- 
ing the  world  with  all  it  needs  to  know  in  order  to 
derive  from  that  event  all  the  benefit  it  was  de- 
signed to  impart.  It  cannot  be  supposed  that  God 
would  do  things  by  halves.  We  cannot  persuade 
ourselves  that  he  would  make  so  vast  a  departure 
from  his  normal  course  of  action  as  the  resurrec- 
tion would  involve,  and  then  allow  the  purpose  he 
had  in  view  to  be  foiled  through  a  lack  of  those 
who  would  have  the  ability  to  interpret  it.  It 
cannot  be  doubted  that  such  a  career  as  is  ascribed 
to  Jesus  in  the  Gospels  means,  if  the  account  is 
trustworthy,  something  of  immeasurable  value  to 
the  human  race.  We  must  feel  that  the  infinite 
Reason  which  is  behind  all  phenomena  has  mani- 
fested itself  in  that  history  as  in  nothing  else  which 
has  happened  on  the  earth.  The  inference  will  be 
irresistible  that  such  a  work  of  divine  providence 
would  not  have  been  wrought  unless  there  was  in 


176    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

it  a  lesson  that  was  indispensable  to  the  welfare 
of  mankind,  and  unless  God  intended  to  provide  a 
means  by  which  it  would  be  made  sure  that  the 
lesson  would  not  be  lost.  In  other  words,  by  as 
much  as  we  are  inclined  to  admit  that  Jesus  rose 
from  the  dead,  by  so  much  are  we  constrained  to 
believe  that  the  original  records  of  that  event  are 
free  from  important  errors,  and  that  those  to  whom 
was  committed  the  duty  of  proclaiming  it  did  not 
seriously  obscure  its  meaning. 

What  is  true  in  this  regard  of  the  resurrection 
of  Christ  is  equally  so  in  respect  to  the  other 
miracles  recorded  in  the  Bible.  If  they  are  viewed 
as  supernatural  occurrences  brought  about  by  the 
Almighty  for  a  special  object,  they  imply  the  exist- 
ence of  competent  interpreters;  for  without  these 
they  are  useless.  They  must  be  supplemented 
by  such  human  utterances  as  wiU  bring  them  into 
practical  relation  with  the  human  understanding, 
or  they  will  represent  merely  a  fruitless  expendi- 
ture of  divine  force.  A  miracle  which  conveys  no 
adequate  truth  is  wasted.  Coincidently  with  every 
exceptional  display  of  divine  power  for  a  religious 
end,  we  must  believe  that  an  influence  has  been 
providentially  exerted  upon  some  human  minds 
which  will  render  them  competent  to  unfold  the 
meaning  of  what  has  taken  place. 

Nor  is  it  only  the  believers  in  Christian  super- 
naturalism  who  are  compelled  to  adopt  such  an 
inference.  The  deist,  the  disciple  of  natural  reli- 
gion, must  do  the  same.     If  God  is  manifesting 


INSPIRATION  177 

himself  in  the  normal  course  of  events,  it  cannot 
be  doubted  that  he  has  included  among  the  edu- 
cational influences  which  he  has  brought  to  bear 
on  humanity  some  method  of  imparting  to  it  the 
knowledge  of  himself  which  it  needs  for  its  com- 
plete spiritual  development.  As  it  seems  to  be  his 
will  that  the  human  race  shall  be  instructed,  in 
the  main,  through  the  agency  of  its  own  superior 
minds,  it  must  be  taken  for  granted  that  there  will 
be  some  among  these  which  will  be  able  to  grasp 
the  profound  facts  of  the  natural  revelation.  There 
is  presupposed  an  ability  on  the  part  of  at  least 
some  men  to  understand  what  he  is  trying  to  teach 
and  to  communicate  it  with  sufficient  accuracy  to 
others. 

Now,  if  we  ask  how  it  has  come  about  that  there 
have  been  human  minds  which  were  equal  to  so 
great  a  responsibility,  how  it  happens  that  there 
are  always  those  in  the  world  who  are  competent 
to  initiate  their  fellow  men  into  some,  at  least,  of 
the  mysteries  of  God,  we  have  caught  a  glimpse 
of  the  problem  which  the  theory  of  inspiration  was 
framed  to  solve. 

The  human  mind  is  a  mystery.  Psychology 
can,  at  the  best,  only  describe  its  workings  with- 
out being  able  to  explain  them.  The  philoso- 
phers who  refer  aU  mental  action  to  successive 
modifications  of  brain  tissue  and  the  physician  who 
includes  sin  and  crime  in  the  pathology  of  the  ner- 
vous system  have,  if  they  are  right,  only  pushed 
the  mystery  one   step  further  back.      What  the 


178    THE  RATIONAL   BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

brain  tissue  or  the  nervous  system  is,  how  mere 
cellular  changes  can  produce  the  phenomena  of 
thought  or  emotion,  they  do  not  pretend  to  know. 
These  are  questions  to  which  the  oracles  of  science 
are  dumb. 

Every  one  who  notes  with  any  care  the  opera- 
tions of  his  own  mind  is  likely  to  become  con- 
vinced that  it  is,  to  a  very  large  extent,  automatic 
in  its  action.  It  is  not  a  servant  to  whom  he  can 
say,  "  Go,"  or  "  Come,"  with  any  assurance  that 
he  will  always  be  obeyed.  Thought  and  feeling, 
although  they  may  be  in  a  measure  controlled  by 
the  volitions,  are  essentially  independent  of  them, 
and  often  decline  to  be  ruled  by  them.  Memory 
sometimes  refuses  obstinately  to  open  its  records, 
no  matter  how  much  it  may  be  coaxed.  Emotions 
that  are  appropriate  to  certain  experiences  will 
sometimes  fail  to  manifest  themselves  in  spite  of 
every  exertion  of  the  will.  The  reasoning  faculty 
is  frequently  baffled  by  problems  which  it  is  con- 
vinced it  ought  to  be  able  to  solve.  The  poet, 
the  inventor,  the  philosopher,  when  he  sits  down 
to  think,  can  never  know  in  advance  that  ideas 
which  will  be  of  any  value  to  him  will  suggest 
themselves.  Thoughts  frame  themselves  within 
him  spontaneously.  They  rise  to  the  surface  of 
consciousness  like  bubbles  in  an  effervescing  liquid. 
He  can  only  watch  them  and  select  from  them 
what  he  can  use  ;  or,  at  l^jhe  best,  he  can  stir  up 
and  stimulate  the  mind  so  that  they  may  rise 
faster.     No  small  part  of  his  labor  will  consist  in 


INSPIRATION  179 

keeping  down  or  discarding  those  wluch  are  for- 
eign to  liis  purpose,  and  which  make  their  way  into 
consciousness  unbidden. 

There  are  circumstances,  however,  which  can- 
not always  be  accurately  defined  beforehand  in 
which  mental  action  while  thus  operating  yields 
highly  satisfactory  and  even  abnormal  results.  A 
train  of  thought  enters  the  mind  which  is  of  such 
a  character  as  to  astonish  and  delight  him  to  whom 
it  comes.  It  seems  to  have  entirely  mastered  him. 
He  cannot,  without  difficulty,  control  or  check  it 
if  he  will.  It  will  not  suffer  him  to  sleep,  perhaps. 
And  when  it  has  run  its  course  he  reviews  it  with 
something  like  amazement.  It  is  so  far  above 
the  familiar  level  of  his  mental  operations  that  it 
does  not  seem  to  have  emanated  from  himself. 
He  accords  to  it  the  admiration  which  he  is  wont 
to  bestow  on  the  intellectual  achievements  of  an- 
other person.  As  he  recalls  it  in  after  years,  he  is 
puzzled  to  understand  how  he  could  ever  have 
been  equal  to  it. 

Or  take  the  case  of  a  public  speaker.  When  he 
faces  his  audience  for  the  first  time  it  is  with  mis- 
givings which,  for  a  few  moments,  seem  to  have 
been  abundantly  justified.  He  expresses  himself 
awkwardly  ;  he  is  oppressed  by  the  presence  of  so 
many  people  ;  he  is  sure  that  his  speech  will  prove 
a  failure.  But  gradually  a  new  power  comes  upon 
him.  His  stammering  utterance  gives  place  to  an 
easy  fluency.  Language  seems  to  have  placed  it- 
seK  at  his  command.     He  is  conscious  that  he  is 


180    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

holding  the  attention  and  swaying  the  minds  of  aU 
present.  He  wonders  at  himself.  He  cannot  ac- 
count for  the  eloquence  and  the  facility  of  diction 
which  are  so  impressing  the  listeners.  The  ease 
and  confidence  with  which  he  is  speaking  are  new 
and  strange  to  him.  He  is  sure  that  he  has  never 
before  thought  so  clearly  or  expressed  himself  so 
well.  He  is  aware  that  in  a  private  conversation 
he  would  be  incapable  of  saying  so  forcibly  or  at 
all  what  he  is  now  uttering  with  so  little  effort  in 
public.  A  situation  which  he  would  have  sup- 
posed would  embarrass  him  extremely  has  had 
precisely  the  opposite  effect,  and  has  proved  an 
unwonted  stimulus  and  a  source  of  strength.  Too 
feeble,  as  he  had  deemed  himseK,  to  express  him- 
self effectively  in  the  parlor,  he  has  become  an 
orator  on  the  platform. 

Such  experiences  as  these  are  very  common, 
and  afford  a  key  or  clue  to  the  meaning  of  inspira- 
tion. The  man  who  thus  outdoes  himself,  as  the 
expression  is,  will  probably  say  that  he  must  have 
been  inspired.  If  the  intellectual  or  emotional 
effect  produced  by  him  on  others  is  recognized  by 
them  as  unusual  or  abnormal,  they  will  account  for 
it  in  the  same  way.  In  doing  so  they  may  find  it 
hard  or  impossible  to  define  their  terms.  They 
may  use  the  word  "inspiration"  very  loosely  and 
vaguely.  But  the  fact  that  they  use  it  at  all  be- 
trays a  consciousness  that  it  expresses  something 
which  can  be  indicated  in  no  other  way.  When 
the  quality  or   effect    of   a  literary,  musical,  or 


INSPIRATION  181 

oratorical  performance  surpasses  noticeably  what 
experience  has  taught  men  to  expect  under  like 
circumstances,  the  result  is  ascribed  by  them  to 
inspiration. 

There  are  phenomena  in  the  operations  o£  the 
physical  nature  of  a  man  which  are  analogous  to 
those  just  described,  and  suggest  an  explanation  of 
them.  For  example,  he  starts  to  run  a  race,  and, 
in  a  few  minutes  perhaps,  becomes  exhausted.  He 
presses  on,  however,  panting  and  weary,  hardly 
able  to  drag  one  foot  after  the  other,  falling  far 
behind  his  rivals,  almost  ready  to  give  up  the  con- 
test in  despair,  when  suddenly  a  new  power  comes 
to  his  rescue.  His  fatigue  is  gone,  he  breathes 
easily,  he  feels  almost  as  fresh  and  vigorous  as 
when  he  left  the  starting-line.  He  swiftly  over- 
takes his  competitors.  The  exertions  he  is  making 
have  become  pleasant  instead  of  painful.  And 
when  he  has  reached  the  goal  he  is  almost  in  con- 
dition to  begin  another  race.  What  has  happened 
to  him  ?  He  will  probably  say  that  he  has  "  got 
his  second  wind."  A  physiologist  would  explain 
that  he  had  at  first  been  using  only  a  portion  of 
his  lungs,  and  that  his  sudden  accession  of  vigor 
was  due  to  the  fact  that  he  had  at  length  begun 
to  inflate  them  fully.  He  unconsciously  brought 
into  action  his  reserves.  He  unwittingly  tapped 
the  sources  of  an  hitherto  unused  power.  His  ex- 
citement and  unwonted  exertions  aroused  a  dor- 
mant energy  within  him  which  seemed  to  him 
abnormal  because  it  had  been  so  seldom  exercised. 


182    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

Now  it  would  not  be  mucli  amiss  etymologicaUy 
as  weU  as  physiologically  to  call  this  experience 
a  physical  inspiration ;  and  it  suggests  an  expla- 
nation of  what  is  known  as  inspiration  in  popular 
speech.  When  the  latent  powers  of  the  human 
mind  are  brought  into  operation,  when  the  full 
vigor  of  its  creative  faculties  has  been  aroused, 
when,  as  a  result  of  some  extraordinary  stimulus, 
the  whole  of  the  mental  resources  of  the  man  show 
themselves,  he  is  said,  in  common  parlance,  to  be 
inspired.  Colloquially  speaking,  his  soul  has  "  got 
its  second  wind." 

Inspiration,  as  thus  conceived,  may  be  said  to 
be  of  different  kinds  when  considered  in  reference 
to  the  various  spheres  in  which  it  shows  itself, 
but  essentially  it  is  always  the  same.  The  inspira- 
tion of  Shakespeare  manifests  itself  in  an  almost 
superhuman  insight  into  human  nature,  and  a  mar- 
velous aptitude  for  literary  expression  ;  that  of 
Raphael  and  every  preeminent  artist  is  exhibited 
in  a  striking  realism  of  pictorial  effect  or  in  a 
matchless  skill  in  using  dead  marble  so  as  to  pro- 
duce the  impression  of  actual  life  ;  that  of  Demos- 
thenes and  all  great  orators  is  evinced  in  a  pecul- 
iar success  in  employing  argument  and  persuasion 
so  as  to  control  the  reason  and  the  feelings  of  an 
audience  and  to  sway  the  wills  of  men  in  predeter- 
mined directions.  Science  has  its  inspirations, 
as  when  a  Newton  leaps  to  the  height  of  a  grand 
generalization.  So  has  mechanics,  as  when  a  sud- 
den intuition  reveals  to  an  inventor  a  possible  sew- 


INSPIRATION  183 

ing-machine  or  telephone.  So  has  statesmanship, 
as  appeared  when  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States  was  framed,  and  an  instrument  came  into 
existence  which  was  able  to  reconcile  the  jarring 
opinions  of  the  time  and  to  endure  the  strain  of  a 
century  of  political  antagonisms  and  conflict.  In 
each  of  these  cases  the  human  mind  seemed  to 
exceed  its  normal  powers  because  its  unused  re- 
sources were  called  into  action  ;  and  viewing  the 
process  in  the  light  of  its  results  and  its  circum- 
stances, men  call  it  an  inspiration. 

Many  of  those  who  admit  the  inspiration  of  the 
Bible,  or  of  some  parts  of  it,  have  in  mind  only  a 
literary  inspiration.  They  are  impressed  by  the 
noble  poetry  of  the  psalmist,  the  eloquent  diction 
of  the  prophet,  or  the  faithful  delineation  of  char- 
acter by  the  evangelist.  The  prayer  of  Habakkuk, 
the  drama  of  Job,  the  wisdom  of  Proverbs,  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount,  Paul's  panegyric  on  Love, 
they  concede  to  be  inspired,  while  regarding  them 
from  merely  an  aesthetic  or  a  literary  point  of  view. 
There  is  in  these  and  many  other  passages  of 
Scripture  an  intellectual  power  or  a  literary  music 
which  they  recognize  as  of  an  exceptionally  high 
order,  and  the  inspiration  which  they  acknowledge 
does  not  differ  in  any  respect  from  that  which  they 
attribute  to  Goethe  or  Virgil. 

And  beyond  aU  controversy  there  is  much  in- 
spiration of  this  sort  in  the  Bible.  There  is  no 
grander  or  more  beautiful  literature  than  is  to  be 
found  in  that  wonderful  book.     The  human  mind 


184    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

has  never  winged  a  loftier  flight  than  has  been 
achieved  by  some  of  the  sacred  authors.  For 
wealth  of  imagery,  for  eloquence  of  utterance,  for 
majestic  simplicity,  for  condensed  energy  of  ex- 
pression, for  beauty  of  thought,  there  are  large 
portions  of  the  Scriptures  which  are  unsurpassed 
and,  indeed,  unequaled.  But  we  are  accustomed 
to  distinguish  the  inspiration  of  the  sacred  volume 
from  that  of  every  other  in  at  least  one  respect :  it 
represents  to  our  minds  the  profoundest  and  truest 
insight  into  the  mystery  of  human  life  and  destiny, 
into  the  philosophy  of  existence  and  the  ultimate 
reason  of  things,  that  the  human  intellect  has  ever 
obtained.  Inspiration,  therefore,  as  a  theological 
term,  may  be  defined  as  human  genius  applied  with 
exceptional  success  to  religious  discovery  and  in- 
struction, the  profoundest  entrance  of  human  fac- 
ulties into  the  realm  of  spiritual  truth.  The  same 
mental  elevation  which  has  given  the  world  many 
of  its  best  ideas  and  facts  in  various  departments 
of  human  research  is  called  inspiration,  in  the  re- 
ligious sense  of  the  word,  when  it  has  penetrated 
the  unseen  world  and  solved,  to  any  important  ex- 
tent, the  problems  relating  to  it. 

It  is  not,  therefore,  necessarily  in  itself  an  abnor- 
mal endowment.  Many  a  man  who  never  thinks  of 
himself  as  inspired  has  experiences  which  make  it 
possible  for  him  to  understand  what  inspiration  in 
the  theological  sense  is,  and  some,  perhaps,  to  which 
the  term  itself,  at  least  in  some  relative  sense,  can 
properly  be   applied.     As   many  a  musician  has 


INSPIRATION  185 

moments  of  exceptional  creative  power  in  which  he 
is  able  to  form  some  idea  of  the  influences  that 
wrought  upon  the  mind  of  some  great  composer 
while  producing  his  masterpiece,  and  as  many  a 
public  speaker  has  epochs  of  intellectual  and  emo- 
tional elevation  in  which  he  can  appreciate,  in  some 
measure,  the  mental  forces  which  gave  birth  to 
some  immortal  oration,  so  there  is  no  lack  of  those 
whose  religious  experiences  have  been  at  times  so 
peculiar  and  so  luminous  as  to  suggest,  though 
perhaps  faintly,  the  processes  by  which  the  men 
who  spake  as  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost 
obtained  their  marvelous  spiritual  light  and  con- 
fidence. In  other  words,  inspiration  is  only  a 
phenomenal,  or  at  least  a  special,  development  of 
a  power  which  resides  potentially  in  every  human 
mind. 

If  we  would  inquire  how  the  Hebrew  people 
happened  to  produce  the  manifestations  of  this 
power  which  have  rendered  the  inspiration  of  its 
sacred  teachers  so  unique  and  so  permanently  in- 
fluential, we  shall  need  to  bear  in  mind  that  other 
nations  have  developed  exceptional  creative  apti- 
tudes in  other  directions.  It  is  to  Greece  that  the 
world  owes  its  conception  of  artistic  beauty  and  its 
philosophical  trends  ;  to  Rome  it  is  indebted  for 
the  essentials  of  its  jurisprudence  and  the  spirit 
of  organization.  It  is  commonly  said  that  the 
Hebrews  had  a  genius  for  religion.  If  what  is 
meant  is  that  as  a  race  they  were  specially  fitted 
to  grapple  with  religious  problems,  to  trace  politi- 


186    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

cal  effects  back  to  their  original  moral  causes,  and 
to  shed  hght  on  the  seeming  contradictions  that 
mysteriously  occur  in  human  life,  the  statement  is 
doubtless  true.  No  other  race  has  so  profoundly 
influenced  human  thought  along  these  lines.  The 
utterances  of  a  few  men  in  an  obscure  corner  of 
the  world  are  the  source  from  which  three  promi- 
nent religions  are  still  deriving  much  of  their  life. 
They  are  the  origin  of  and  even  the  authority  for 
moral  conceptions  and  beliefs  on  which  modern 
civilization  is  largely  founded. 

It  is  not  so  easy  to  explain  how  this  remarkable 
people  came  to  be  so  endowed.  But  even  if  we  set 
aside  those  portions  of  its  written  records  to  the 
historicity  of  which  the  higher  criticism  demurs, 
the  fact  stiU  stands  out  with  sufficient  clearness 
that  the  history  of  the  Hebrew  race  is,  for  the  most 
part,  that  of  a  long  struggle  between  a  monothe- 
istic conception  of  religion  and  various  polytheistic 
tendencies.  Starting  out  with  a  lofty,  though  per- 
haps somewhat  crude  and  antlu-opomorpliic  idea 
of  Jehovah,  they  were  able  to  verify  and  enlarge 
it  by  national  experiences  which  covered  many 
centuries.  As  an  individual  who  would  know  God 
by  inductive  experience  must  begin  with  the  h3^o- 
thesis  that  the  Christian  conception  of  the  Deity  is 
correct  in  order  that  he  may  have  sometliing  by 
which  to  explain  his  religious  experiences,  so  the 
Jews  as  a  nation  began  with  a  conception  of  the 
Supreme  Being  which  they  could  test  by  their 
national  experiences,  and  by  which  they  could  in- 


INSPIRATION  187 

terpret  these.  They  seem  to  have  been  seldom,  if 
ever,  during  the  formative  years  of  their  national 
life,  without  teachers  who  made  it  their  mission  to 
point  out  the  religious  meaning  of  events,  to  asso- 
ciate national  reverses  and  successes  with  corre- 
sponding changes  in  the  popular  attitude  towards 
Jehovah.  In  tliis  way  the  race  was  able  to  per- 
form on  a  large  scale  the  induction  described  in  an 
earher  chapter,  by  which  any  one  in  our  own  day 
may  arrive  at  an  indestructible  belief  in  the  God 
of  the  Christian  Scriptures  and  in  an  overruling 
Providence. 

The  logic  of  events  was  ever  confirming  the 
prophetic  view  of  the  conditions  of  national  success, 
as  the  type  of  character  which  was  most  in  har- 
mony with  it  was  uniformly  justified  in  the  national 
struggle  for  existence.  Natural  selection  went 
hand  in  hand  with  prophecy.  As  has  been  indi- 
cated elsewhere,  it  eliminated  from  the  national 
life  ideas  and  practices  which  were  not  in  accord 
with  the  highest  monotheistic  conceptions.  The 
survival  of  the  fittest,  the  persistence  of  the  purest 
religious  type,  is  recognized  in  what  the  critics  call 
the  unhistorical  legends  of  the  Old  Testament,  and 
is  taught  no  less  clearly  in  the  later  annals.  Abra- 
ham, Isaac,  and  Jacob,  not  to  mention  personages 
assigned  to  a  still  earher  date,  represent  so  many 
providential  preferences  of  the  more  to  the  less  re- 
ligiously susceptible  mind.  The  glory  of  David's 
reign  was  that  of  a  monarch  who,  more  than  any 
other  in  the  line  of  Jewish  kings,  was  imbued  with 


188    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

the  spirit  of  the  national  religion.  The  heresy  of 
the  ten  tribes  disappeared  as  a  Hebrew  cult  with 
that  section  of  the  nation  which  had  adopted  it. 
The  repopnlation  of  Jerusalem  by  the  returning 
exiles  more  than  four  centuries  before  the  Chris- 
tian era  marked  a  most  thorough  excision  of  dis- 
cordant religious  beliefs  from  the  national  life,  for 
the  personal  sacrifice  which  it  involved  must  have 
excluded  from  the  movement  all  save  those  who 
were  intensely  loyal  to  the  old  religion.  As  a  re- 
sult of  all  these  influences  polytheism  and  idolatry 
were  finally  weeded  out  of  the  faith  and  religious 
practice  of  the  whole  people. 

The  concentration  of  national  thought  on  the 
one  subject  of  religion  which  was  brought  about  by 
the  varied  experiences  of  the  nation  could  not  fail 
to  produce  an  unique  literature,  and  it  was  to  be 
expected  that  those  portions  of  it  which  should  be 
preserved  by  the  discrimination  and  taste  of  a  whole 
people  who  had  been  educated  in  the  manner  de- 
scribed would  prove  to  be  the  most  important  con- 
tribution to  religious  science  that  the  human  race 
is  capable  of  making.  Their  experiences  had  made 
the  Jews  not  only  a  race  fertile  in  religious  authors, 
but  also  a  race  of  capable  critics  of  religious  liter- 
ature, a  fact  which  would  have  an  important  bear- 
ing on  the  selection  and  preservation  of  their  sacred 
writings.  These  would  represent,  therefore,  a 
competent  generalization  from  an  almost  infinitely 
diversified  national  experience,  the  results  of  the 
most  protracted,  intelligent,  and  thorough  induction 


INSPIRATION  189 

that  has  ever  been  employed  for  the  discovery  of 
religious  truth. 

These  experiences  and  the  resulting  religious 
philosophy  which  had  been  forced,  as  it  were,  upon 
a  whole  people  by  the  countless  facts  of  many  cen- 
turies, found  expression  in  prose  and  poetry,  in 
history,  fiction,  and  perhaps  in  myths,  in  sermons, 
hymns,  and  popular  maxims.  Even  the  primitive 
legends  and  the  simple,  artless  chronicles  of  this 
exceptional  people  show  the  influence  of  the  domi- 
nant, inbred  religious  idea,  for  they  refer,  with  an 
unwavering  self -consistency,  all  events  to  a  single 
divine  Cause,  and  see  in  aU  the  vicissitudes  of  life 
a  confirmation  of  the  same  religious  philosophy. 

It  is  useless  to  deny  on  account  of  the  alleged 
unhistorical  character  of  certain  early  traditions 
and  the  supposed  inaccuracies  of  later  records  that 
such  an  inspiration  is  divine.  It  might  be  freely 
admitted  that  the  sacred  historians  were  dependent 
for  their  facts  on  the  ordinary  sources  of  historical 
information ;  that  they  simply  wrote  the  best  ac- 
counts of  their  national  origin  and  growth  that 
they  could  compile  from  the  material  within  reach  ; 
that  their  narratives  disagree  with  one  another  when 
written  from  different  points  of  view  even  as  the 
interpretation  of  events  in  American  history  by  a 
Democratic  author  might  not  harmonize  with  that 
of  a  writer  with  Kepublican  sympathies,  —  all  this 
might  be  conceded,  and  yet  the  question  of  in- 
spiration would  remain  untouched.  We  get  from 
Prescott  a  somewhat  different  idea  of  the  civili- 


190    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

zation  of  the  A2rtecs  at  the  time  of  the  Spanish 
conquest  from  that  which  we  obtain  from  John 
Fiske.  We  miss  in  the  latter  some  of  that  out- 
ward magnificence  and  material  splendor  which 
impart  to  the  history  of  the  author  first  named  so 
much  of  the  coloring  and  fascination  of  a  romance ; 
yet,  I  presume,  both  writers  made  use  of  the  same 
original  sources  of  information.  The  discrepancy 
between  them  which  has  just  been  suggested  would 
be  due,  no  doubt,  in  that  case,  to  a  difference  in 
mental  tendency,  to  an  unlikeness  in  their  capacity 
for  drawing  historical  inferences. 

So,  too,  large  diversities  of  statement  are  to  be 
expected  between  American  and  English  authors 
who  treat  the  subject  of  our  Revolutionary  War, 
or  between  Northern  and  Southern  writers  who 
undertake  to  explain  the  political  movements  which 
culminated  in  the  war  of  secession.  There  is 
always  a  personal  equation  which  affects  the  lit- 
erary results  of  such  attempts.  The  inevitable 
fact  that  every  historian's  own  mental  make-up  in- 
fluences him  more  or  less  in  his  judgment  of  his 
authorities,  and  communicates  to  the  facts  which 
they  record  a  color  which  will  not  be  of  precisely 
the  same  shade  as  that  which  tinges  the  conclusions 
of  any  other  wi'iter,  is  certain  to  produce  more  or 
less  of  disagreement  even  between  obviously  im- 
partial narratives  of  the  same  occurrences.  If  the 
writer  last  named  has  the  correct  conception  of  the 
Aztec  civilization,  Prescott  might  be  said  to  illus- 
trate somewhat  that  tendency  to  "  idealize  "  which 


INSPIRATION  191 

is  ascribed  so  often  to  some  of  the  Old  Testament 
historians.  This  is  not  necessarily  a  tendency  to 
pervert  known  facts  in  order  to  favor  a  precon- 
ceived theory ;  it  may  be  only  an  unconscious 
partiality  for  such  traditionary  material  as  affords 
the  most  flattering  view  of  the  origin  and  essential 
dignity  of  a  kingdom  or  an  organization.  The 
differences  between  Chronicles  and  other  prophetic 
books  in  regard  to  the  original  importance  of  the 
Levitical  order  may  be  a  case  in  point.  They 
might  conceivably  be  due  to  a  diversity  of  opinion 
in  the  interpretation  of  the  same  original  material, 
or  to  a  difference  in  the  principles  which  have  gov- 
erned the  selections  made  from  it.  In  that  event 
they  would  constitute  no  objection  to  the  doctrine 
of  inspiration  unless  this  is  understood  to  imply 
such  a  divine  superintendence  of  an  author's  work 
as  insures  its  accuracy  even  in  unimportant  details, 
instead  of  such  a  providential  guidance  as  enables 
him  to  use  imperfect  resources  and  the  best  infor- 
mation attainable  so  as  to  arrive  at  correct  religious 
results. 

We  must  not  lose  sight  of  the  undeniable  truth 
that  the  Bible  recognizes  what  I  have  elsewhere 
called  the  economy  of  the  supernatural.  If  effects 
are  wrought  by  divine  power,  only  so  much  of  this 
is  used  as  will  render  natural  agencies  sufficient. 
Jesus  himself  illustrated  this  fact  and  indorsed  the 
principle  involved  in  it  when  he  directed  that  the 
fragments  of  the  miraculous  feasts  should  be  saved, 
and  thus  showed  that  only  so  much  supernatural 


192    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

energy  had  been  exercised  as  would  serve  the  pre- 
sent needs  of  the  multitudes  and  the  disciples. 
The  dividing  of  the  Ked  Sea,  according  to  the 
Biblical  account,  was  due  wholly  to  natural  causes, 
and  was  miraculous  only  in  the  sense  that  these 
carried  out  an  oral  command.  Special  divine  aid 
is  not  to  be  excessive  in  amount.  The  same  law, 
when  applied  to  inspiration,  would  lead  us  to  ex- 
pect only  so  much  of  special  divine  agency  as  would 
secure  the  end  in  view.  If  tliis  is  conceived  to  be, 
in  the  case  now  in  hand,  only  the  proper  religious 
interpretation  of  events,  such  a  wasteful  imparta- 
tion  of  divine  knowledge  as  would  encroach  upon 
the  province  of  the  secular  historian  and  insure  a 
needless  accuracy  in  unessential  details  ought  not 
to  be  looked  for. 

The  so-called  prophetic  books  are  not  to  be 
viewed  as  containing  a  history  so  much  as  a  philo- 
sophy of  history.  Their  inspiration  may  not  im- 
ply, and  certainly  does  not  consist  in,  an  absolute 
freedom  from  errors  of  every  sort,  from  mistakes 
in  transcribing  or  selecting  the  facts  derived  from 
earlier  documents,  but  in  an  inerrant  judgment  of 
the  deepest  meaning  of  events,  in  a  clear  discern- 
ment of  the  law  of  divine  providence,  in  an  ability 
to  point  out  with  courage  and  precision  the  pro- 
found causes  of  national  or  individual  success  and 
failure.  It  is  this  clear  insight  into  the  heart  of 
things  which  justifies  us  in  ascribing  the  quality 
of  inspiration  to  narratives  which,  when  viewed 
merely  with  reference  to  their  literary  form,  might 
seem  monotonous  and  dry. 


INSPIRATION  193 

This  same  deep  knowledge  of  cause  and  effect 
underlies  tlie  prophecies.  These  may  be  called  as 
a  whole  sermons  on  the  conditions  of  political  suc- 
cess, on  the  laws  of  national  growth  and  prosperity. 
There  have  not  been  wanting  in  modern  times 
seers  who  could  forecast  with  marvelous  exactness 
coming  events  in  the  political  world.  Burke's  pre- 
diction of  the  French  Revolution  is  often  cited  in 
proof  of  this  fact.  Montcalm's  ^  description  of  the 
effect  that  the  anticipated  fall  of  Quebec  would 
produce  on  the  relations  of  the  American  colonies 
to  the  mother  country  will  illustrate,  whether  it 
be  genuine  or  not,  the  mental  process  by  which 
history  is  written  in  advance.  But  the  Hebrew 
prophets  commanded  a  longer  perspective  than  is 
exhibited  in  these  examples.  That  inbred  racial 
inspiration  which  revealed  to  them  the  primordial 
cause  of  their  own  national  vicissitudes,  that  pene- 
trating vision  which  could  trace  the  long  succes- 
sion of  political  events  back  to  its  very  source, 
enabled  them  to  pronounce,  generations  before  the 
final  catastrophe,  the  fall  of  cities  and  empires 
which  were  at  discord  with  the  eternal  facts  that 
are  back  of  governments  and  of  organizations  of 
all  kinds.  As  a  builder  foretells  with  certainty  the 
eventual  collapse  of  a  warehouse  whose  walls  are 
out  of  plumb  or  whose  foundations  are  not  firm, 
so  the  seers  of  the  Bible,  rooted  and  grounded  as 
they  were  in  the  philosophy  of  their  own  history, 
in  the  principles  on  which  all  permanent  society 

1  Carlyle,  Frederick  the  Great  and  his  Times. 


194    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

must  rest,  felt  that  there  was  more  of  the  element 
of  endurance  in  their  own  little  nation  than  there 
was  in  the  great  pagan  states  which  overshadowed 
it  in  turn.  They  launched  their  words  of  doom 
against  Babylon  and  Nineveh,  against  Tyre  and 
Egypt,  because  they  could  already  see  the  cracks 
in  the  foundation  walls  of  all  heathen  prosperity, 
the  flaw  in  the  corner-stone  of  every  social  edifice 
which  was  not  built  in  harmony  with  what  they 
knew  to  be  the  laws  of  the  moral  universe. 

But  did  all  of  their  revelations  come  to  them  in 
this  way  ?  Was  every  prediction  made  by  them 
only  an  accurate  deduction  from  known  facts  and 
laws  ?  Did  their  trances,  their  dreams,  their  seem- 
ingly objective  visions,  only  indicate  certain  men- 
tal states  in  which  the  logical  faculty,  their  nat- 
ural skill  in  reasoning  from  cause  to  effect,  was 
abnormally  stimulated  ?  Few  who  have  had  a  deep 
and  varied  religious  experience  would  answer  these 
questions  affirmatively.  Some  —  perhaps  many 
—  would  say  that  spiritual  influences  had  been 
exerted  at  times  upon  themselves,  that  communi- 
cations of  a  religious  import  had  been  made  to 
them  which  could  not  be  referred  to  the  operation 
of  known  psychological  laws,  and  they  would  argue 
that  similar  phenomena  must  have  characterized 
the  inspiration  of  the  prophet  and  the  evangelist 
through  whose  teachings  they  have  acquired  their 
own  spiritual  sensitiveness.  They  would  contend 
that  mental  suggestions  have  been  made  to  them 
at  certain  critical  or  important  epochs  in  their 


INSPIRATION  195 

lives  which  must  have  emanated  from  some  higher 
source  than  could  be  discovered  within  themselves, 
and  which  bear  a  marked  resemblance,  in  that  re- 
spect, to  various  communications  which  are  said, 
in  the  Scriptures,  to  have  been  imparted  to  the 
men  of  God. 

The  answer  given  to  these  questions  will  in  the 
end  depend  largely  on  the  mental  attitude  that 
is  assumed  towards  the  miracle.  If  it  is  deemed 
probable  that  laws  pertaining  to  a  higher  sphere 
of  influence  than  falls  within  the  scope  of  ordinary 
human  experience  have  produced  within  the  lim- 
ited range  of  terrestrial  vision  effects  which  may 
be  called,  in  that  sense,  supernatural,  there  will 
be  no  objection  to  believing  that  knowledge  which 
transcends  the  normal  reach  of  the  intellectual 
faculties  may  have  found  its  way  into  the  human 
mind  from  the  same  supernal  source.  As  ex- 
plained earlier  in  this  chaj)ter,  the  origin  of  all 
thought  is  a  mystery.  There  is  frequently  an  in- 
dependence in  our  ideas  which  renders  them  inex- 
plicable by  the  laws  of  mental  association.  The 
researches  of  certain  psychical  investigators  are 
making  it  more  and  more  evident  that  there  is  a 
mysterious  border-land  in  the  human  soul  where 
mind  unconsciously  influences  mind,  and  where 
suggestions  from  without  are  registered.  It  is 
certainly  conceivable  —  there  are  those  who  would 
say  it  is  certain  —  that  man  is  not  always  so  far 
from  God  that  the  voice  of  the  Infinite  cannot 
make  itself  audible,    in  some  real  sense,  to  his 


196    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

understanding,  that  tlie  omniscience  of  the  Most 
High  does  not  overflow  at  times  into  the  dry  chan- 
nels of  our  spiritual  ignorance. 

But  in  whatever  way  inspiration  may  manifest 
itself,  whether  in  a  phenomenal  stimulation  of  the 
natural  powers  or  in  a  direct  revelation  from  God 
hunself,  its  bearing  on  human  development  would 
seem  to  be  clear.  If  we  feel  constrained  to  be- 
lieve that  the  human  race  is  undergoing  what  I 
have  already  referred  to  as  a  period  of  spiritual 
gestation,  in  which  it  is  being  shaped  more  and 
more  into  the  likeness  of  a  parental  Character,  in- 
spiration is  simply  one  of  the  forces  or  influences 
by  which  the  various  features  of  that  Character  are 
being  communicated.  The  history  of  the  human 
reason  is  but  a  record  of  the  different  steps  by 
which  man  has  been  enabled  to  understand  better 
and  better  and  to  imitate  more  and  more  closely 
the  living  Ideal  which  we  call  God.  The  final 
cause  of  evolution  is  the  production  of  an  organic 
type  which  can  be  educated  into  a  knowledge  of 
its  Maker.  The  changes  which  have  been  wrought 
during  the  centuries  in  man's  moral  standards,  the 
growth  of  his  religious  conceptions  tlirough  the 
successive  stages  of  fetichism,  j)olytheism,  anthro- 
pomorphic and  spiritual  monotheism,  only  mark 
an  increasing  ability  on  his  part  to  appropriate  an 
objective  truth.  These  repeated  modifications  and 
improvements  of  the  ethical  and  theistic  concep- 
tions of  mankind  are  analogous  to  the  changes 
which  take  place  in  a  casting  while  the  molten 


INSPIRATION  197 

metal  is  being  poured  into  the  mould.  Whatever 
is  absurd  in  the  successive  forms  which  result  is 
due  only  to  the  fact  that  the  process  is  not  yet 
finished. 

The  mould  in  which  man's  religious  ideas  are 
being  formed  is  itself  not  yet  done.  It  is  being 
slowly  wrought  out  by  the  education  of  the  under- 
standing through  various  natural  agencies,  by  the 
gradual  preparation  of  the  mind  for  the  reception 
of  spiritual  truths.  The  evolution  of  religion  is 
the  twofold  operation  of  making  the  mould  and 
filling  it  as  far  as  made.  It  is  the  providential 
development  of  mental  capacities  in  reference  to 
transcendent  religious  facts,  and  the  simultaneous 
recognition  of  those  facts  according  to  the  measure 
of  the  capacities  already  produced.  Man,  there- 
fore, does  not  create  his  religion,  but  appropriates 
it  through  the  medium  of  a  growing  receptivity 
for  it.  God  is  not  merely  a  concept  which  has 
been  developed  by  numberless  ages  of  human  ex- 
perience ;  he  is  an  external  reality  who  has  been 
shaping  that  experience  so  that  it  will  eventuate 
in  a  mind  which  can  entertain  the  concept.  The 
countless  splashes  of  light  which  waver  and  glim- 
mer on  the  troubled  surface  of  a  pond,  becoming 
fewer  and  fewer  in  number  as  the  ripples  die  down, 
and  aggTegating  themselves  into  larger  and  larger 
patches  of  brightness,  till  at  last  they  coalesce  into 
a  single  reflected  image  of  the  moon,  do  not  create 
that  luminary.  It  was  its  own  previous  existence 
that  made   them  possible   and    called   them   into 


'198    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

being.  So  the  fluctuating  opinions  of  the  human 
race,  which  have  given  birth  to  the  multitudinous 
forms  of  polytheism,  out  of  which  has  arisen  at  last 
the  behef  in  one  God  of  surpassing  moral  splendor, 
did  not  originate  the  character  ascribed  to  him.  It 
was  this,  rather,  that  caused  the  confused  sparkles 
of  religious  illumination  in  the  minds  of  men  who 
were  not  yet  able  to  reflect  a  spiritual,  self-consis- 
tent monotheistic  idea. 

That  the  crowning  utterances  of  Hebrew  inspira- 
tion are  in  harmony  with  the  immediately  foregoing 
statements  cannot  be  doubted.  The  highest  prize 
within  the  range  of  human  achievement,  according 
to  the  teachings  of  Jesus,  is  eternal  life ;  and  this, 
he  says,  is  in  part,  "  to  know  thee,  the  only  true 
God."  Paul  sums  up  his  own  philosophy  of  uni- 
versal history  in  the  thought  that  the  final  cause, 
the  providential  meaning,  of  the  creation  and  dis- 
tribution of  the  human  race  is  "  that  they  should 
seek  God,  if  haply  they  might  feel  after  him  and 
find  him."  And  Joel,  according  to  the  obvious 
meaning  of  one  of  his  prophecies,  a  meaning  which 
Peter  also  adopts,  foresaw  a  time  when  inspiration 
was  to  be  a  general  human  accomplishment,  when 
the  seer,  the  teacher  of  divine  mysteries,  would  not 
be,  as  under  the  imperfect  light  of  the  old  dispen- 
sation, an  exceptional  man,  a  prophet  of  a  type 
that  might  be  wanting  in  the  world  for  hundreds 
of  years,  but  only  an  example  of  what  any  man 
might  become  in  his  own  sphere  when  the  human 
mind  should  be  universally  so  developed  that  God 


INSPIRATION  199 

could  pour  out  his  spirit  on  aU  flesh,  when  sons 
and  daughters,  old  men  and  young  men,  would 
alike  catch  the  light  of  divine  truth  which  at  first 
had  rested  only  on  the  widely  scattered  summits  of 
a  few  exceptionally  developed  minds.  And  every 
deep  religious  conviction  which  overcomes  a  de- 
moralizing doubt,  outstrips  slow  proof,  and  begins 
to  shape  a  life  into  likeness  to  the  Christian  ideal, 
may  be  but  an  illustration,  though  perhaps  on  a 
relatively  small  scale,  of  that  which  is  most  impor- 
tant in  inspiration  as  already  described;  while 
revivals  of  religion  which  bring  hundreds  of  people 
of  every  grade  of  mental  culture  into  the  Christian 
Church,  and  the  widespread  religious  confidence 
which  the  learned  skeptic  contemns  because  it  per- 
sistently refuses  to  see  in  his  arguments  a  proof 
of  its  own  unreasonableness,  may  be  but  so  much 
evidence  that  the  human  race  has  at  last  been 
developed  far  enough  to  receive  indispensable  reli- 
gious intuitions  from  the  Divine  Spirit  himself. 

Revelation  is  a  correlative  term.  It  necessarily 
implies  an  ability  on  the  part  of  mankind  to  un- 
derstand what  is  revealed.  A  revelation  which 
cannot  be  comprehended  is  a  self-contradiction.  If 
we  believe,  therefore,  that  God  has  revealed  him- 
self in  Jesus  Christ,  we  cannot  if  we  would  deny 
that  the  human  race  has  been  furnished  with 
inspiration  enough,  whether  natural  or  supernat- 
ural, to  get  possession  of  the  truths  which  have  thus 
been  disclosed.  Consequently,  it  will  be  irrational 
for  us   not   to  believe  that   the  original    records 


200    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

througli  whicli  liis  teachings  have  been  handed 
down  to  later  generations,  and  apart  from  which 
no  knowledge  of  these  teachings  could  be  had,  are 
that  revelation,  or  at  least  contain  it  in  such  a  form 
that  it  may  be  ascertained.  Now  since  there  is  no 
test  by  which  it  can  be  determined  what  the  rec- 
ords teach  except  the  consensus  of  human  ojDinion, 
it  will  be  rational  for  us  to  assume  that  the  beliefs 
which  have  been  held  by  the  vast  majority  of 
Christians,  or  rather  the  element  in  them  which 
has  remained  constant  from  the  beginning  down 
to  the  present  time,  represents,  at  least  approxi- 
mately, the  truth  which  Christ  has  brought  into 
the  world.  The  same  logical  necessity  which  leaves 
the  believer  in  Christian  supernaturalism  no  escape 
from  the  conclusion  that  men  have  been  raised 
up  to  interpret  correctly  the  miracles  of  the  gospel 
constrains  him  to  believe  that  the  historic  and 
general  understanding  of  the  interpretation  is  es- 
sentially correct,  since  otherwise  there  has  been 
practically  a  failure  to  interpret,  and  the  object  of 
the  miracle  has  been  defeated.  The  widespread 
inspiration  which  Peter  claims  has  come  upon  the 
church  is  nowhere  more  likely  to  exist  than  in 
those  views  of  the  nature  and  substantial  teaching 
of  Christianity  to  which  the  church  as  a  whole 
have  clung  from  the  beginning ;  for  that  they  are 
intrinsically  sound  is  a  necessary  coroUary,  as  has 
just  been  shown,  from  the  theory  of  inspiration, 
and  the  truth  of  that  theory  is  involved  in  the 
acceptance  of  the  miracles. 


INSPIRATION  201 

It  should  be  borne  in  mind,  however,  that  the 
word  "  inspiration,"  in  its  theological  sense,  de- 
notes something  of  relatively  small  practical  value, 
something  of  philosophical  or  theoretic  rather  than 
of  vital  interest.  It  is  of  vastly  more  importance 
that  a  theological  belief  should  be  true  than  that 
it  should  be  derived  from  inspiration.  In  other 
words,  a  truth  is  no  truer  because  it  is  inspired. 
The  theory  of  inspiration  merely  explains  how  cer- 
tain facts  were  discovered,  or  renders  more  credible 
certam  teachings  which  the  average  understanding 
cannot  verify.  Truth,  in  whatever  way  it  is  found, 
is  greater  than  inspiration.  If,  for  example,  the 
writings  of  the  Jewish  historians,  the  four  Gospels, 
and  the  Book  of  Acts  are  believed,  on  general 
grounds,  to  be  reliable,  if  we  are  convinced,  on  the 
same  grounds,  that  they  relate  with  substantial 
accuracy  the  facts  of  which  they  profess  to  treat, 
little,  if  anything,  is  to  be  gained  by  ascribing  to 
the  respective  authors  any  supernatural  divine 
guidance.  In  the  last  analysis  we  shaU  believe 
them,  if  at  all,  not  because  they  are  commonly  held 
to  be  inspired,  but  because  we  are  satisfied  that 
they  are  true.  In  other  words,  attacks  on  any 
particular  theory  of  inspiration,  or  denials  of  the 
inspiration  of  particular  scriptural  books,  have  no 
necessary  tendency,  even  if  they  are  not  refuted,  to 
undermine  the  foundations  of  Christian  behef .  The 
alternative  yet  remains  that,  even  if  the  books  are 
not  in  the  technical  sense  inspired,  they  may  never- 
theless be  true.    That  certain  men  were  so  devoted 


202    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

to  the  service  of  God,  so  dominated  by  their  sense 
of  the  greatness  of  liis  character  and  of  the  duty 
they  owed  to  him,  that  they  were  impelled  to  use 
the  gi'eatest  care  and  observe  the  utmost  fidelity 
in  recording  facts  pertaining  to  his  dealings  with 
mankind  is,  perhaps,  all  that  need  be  said  in  sup- 
port of  the  historic  credibility  of  some  of  the  books 
of  the  Bible ;  but  whether  this  mental  and  moral 
attitude  was  due  to  inspiration  or  not  is  almost 
immaterial.  If  we  believe  that  these  men  were 
inspired  by  God,  we  shall,  of  course,  not  doubt  that 
they  maintained  such  an  attitude ;  but  if  we  are 
convinced  on  other  grounds  that  they  were  honest 
and  truthful  persons,  who  had  abundant  oppor- 
tunities to  know  what  they  affirmed,  and  a  sincere 
desire  to  relate  facts  as  they  were,  we  shall  accept 
their  testimony  with  equal  readiness,  whether  we 
believe  that  their  ability  and  integrity  came  to 
them  in  the  ordinary  way,  or  were  the  fruits  of  a 
special  divine  inspiration. 


CHAPTER  Vni 

DOGMATIC    CHKISTIANITY 

It  is  very  common  nowadays  to  hear  Christian 
dogmas  spoken  of  disparagingly,  if  not  with  con- 
tempt. It  is  very  frequently  assumed  that  they 
constitute  no  essential  part  of  the  Christian  reli- 
gion, but  can  be  separated  from  it  without  injury 
to  it  and  even  to  its  advantage.  The  ethical  teach- 
ings of  Jesus,  illustrated  and  emphasized  as  they 
are  by  his  example,  are  supposed  by  many  to  be 
all  that  is  important  in  the  gospel.  Persistent 
efforts  are  made  to  bring  Christianity  back  to  the 
words  of  Jesus  alone,  and  to  eliminate  from  it  even 
the  influence  of  Paul's  doctrinal  discussions.  It 
is  averred  that  even  within  the  covers  of  the  New 
Testament  we  have  documents  which  gave  a  trend 
to  the  development  of  Christianity  that  its  founder 
did  not  contemplate,  and  which  transformed  what 
was  originally  only  a  pure  and  spiritual  moral 
code  into  a  difficult  and  misleading  religious  phi- 
losophy. 

But  we  have  learned  in  quite  recent  times  to  see 
in  the  continued  existence  of  anything  a  proof  of 
its  utility.  Darwin  and  his  followers  have  taught 
us  to  believe  that  the  various  organs  and  traits  of 


204    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

living  beings  fail  to  disappear  only  because  they 
are  valuable  to  their  possessors  in  the  struggle  for 
existence.  Evolutionists  hold  this  law  to  be  uni- 
versal in  its  scope,  and  would  not  hesitate  to  quote 
it  in  explaining  the  origin  and  persistence  of  an 
idea  or  a  belief.  We  can  count  with  safety  on 
their  support  when  we  affirm  that  if  the  ethics  of 
Jesus  have  become  associated  with  certain  doctri- 
nal creeds,  with  philosophical  statements  of  belief 
in  which  a  constant  element  finds  expression  in 
ever-changing  outward  forms,  it  is  because  these 
creeds  and  articles  of  faith  have  in  them  something 
wliich  has  proved  advantageous  to  the  Christian 
religion. 

Christianity  on  its  ethical  side  is  more  likely  to 
intimidate  and  discourage  than  to  stimulate.  The 
standard  of  virtue  wliich  it  upholds  might  be  called, 
without  much  exaggeration,  superhuman.  The 
single  commandment  in  which  it  sums  up  the  law 
and  the  prophets  is  so  purely  ideal  from  our  pre- 
sent point  of  view  as  to  seem  impracticable  and 
visionary.  To  love  God  with  heart  and  soul  and 
mind  and  strength,  and  one's  neighbor  as  one's  self, 
though  well  calculated  to  win  admiration  as  an 
ethical  conception,  is  not  likely  to  be  regarded  as 
one  that  can  be  attained  in  practice.  It  is  not  so 
very  long  ago  that  the  American  people  heard  the 
Golden  Rule  boldly  stigmatized  as  "  an  iridescent 
dream  "  in  the  sphere  of  politics.  The  Sermon  on 
the  Mount  arouses  a  kind  of  enthusiasm  in  persons 
of  aU  grades  of  moral  culture,  but  viewed  as  a  set 


DOGMATIC   CHRISTIANITY  205 

of  precepts  for  actual  daily  conduct  it  can  hardly 
be  said,  as  a  general  rule,  to  be  taken  seriously. 
Let  it  be  inexorably  prescribed  by  social  reformers 
as  the  one  law  of  universal  and  e very-day  duty,  and 
it  is  more  likely  to  be  greeted  with  a  dubious  shrug 
of  the  shoulders  than  to  enlist  men  in  an  earnest 
effort  to  obey  it.  To  exercise  such  a  rigid  control 
over  the  thoughts  as  it  enjoins,  to  assume  such  a 
dominion  over  the  natural  inclinations  as  will  man- 
ifest itself  in  acts  of  kindness  done  even  to  those 
that  hate  us,  to  be  perfect  even  as  our  heavenly 
Father  is  perfect,  are  large  obligations  to  impose 
on  men  who,  according  to  the  current  philosophy, 
are  but  the  paragons  of  the  brute  creation,  and  who, 
by  unanimous  consent,  have  in  them  vastly  more 
that  is  animal  than  that  is  divine.  So  much  are 
men  impressed  by  this  fact  that  attempts  are  very 
commonly  made,  in  a  somewhat  rabbinical  spirit,  to 
dull  the  sharp  edge  of  some  of  the  sayings  in  this 
wonderful  collection,  and  to  make  this  fundamen- 
tal law  of  Christian  morals  of  none  effect.  There 
have  not  been  wanting  some  who  have  seriously 
maintained  that  it  constitutes  no  part  of  Chris- 
tianity proper.  Those  who  profess  to  derive  from 
it  their  standard  of  moral  obligation  are  seldom,  if 
ever,  prepared  to  accept  without  qualification  as 
binding  upon  them  every  precept  in  it.  So  far 
is  it  above  even  the  highest  level  of  human  conduct 
which  has  come  under  our  personal  observation  that 
any  one  who  should  claim,  in  our  time,  to  observe 
it  perfectly  would  be  likely  to  be  regarded  as  an 


206    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

empty  boaster,  or  as  lacking  in  self-knowledge  and 
ethical  appreciation. 

It  would  seem,  therefore,  to  be  beyond  contro- 
versy that  if  the  moral  teachings  of  the  gospel  are 
to  exert  any  continuous  influence  on  the  conduct 
of  the  human  race,  if  the  most  spiritual  of  them 
are  not  to  be  ignored  as  having  no  relation  to  the 
ethical  resources  of  human  nature,  they  must  be 
made  in  some  way  to  appear  practical ;  men  must 
be  enabled  to  regard  them  as  coming  within  the 
ransre  of  human  achievement.  Ideals  which  are 
obviously  visionary  and  beyond  reach  will  not  long 
influence  human  conduct.  Men  wiU  try  to  visit 
the  north  pole,  but  not  the  north  star.  The  law 
of  the  survival  of  the  fittest  operates  here  as  every- 
where. Only  what  is  useful  will  be  preserved. 
Moral  standards  which  seem  unattainable  will  not 
long  be  regarded  as  obligatory,  and  lower  ones  wiU 
be  substituted  for  them.  A  rule  of  duty  that  is 
too  high  wiU  be  deemed  lacking  in  the  right  to 
command  obedience.  It  may  still  evoke  an  aesthetic 
admiration,  but  it  will  have  no  power  to  stimulate 
the  conscience  or  improve  the  conduct.  It  will  be 
found  easier  to  impugn  the  authority  of  Jesus  as  a 
moral  teacher  than  to  retain  a  moral  standard  which 
is  too  spiritual  for  human  imitation.  His  utter- 
ances will  be  deemed  indefinitely  figurative  or  even 
erroneous,  if  they  bind  burdens  on  the  human  soul 
which  transcend  its  greatest  powers.  The  Christian 
code  will  fare  no  better  than  did  that  of  Moses  if, 
like  that,  it  shall  come  to  seem  impracticable. 


DOGMATIC  CHRISTIANITY  207 

It  is  the  province  of  Christian  dogma  to  avert 
this  danger,  to  meet  these  difficulties.  So  far  is 
it  from  being  true  that  the  so-called  "  doctrines  " 
are  merely  a  parasitical  growth  which  has  almost 
sucked  the  life-blood  out  of  the  religion  of  Jesus, 
it  is  they  that  have  saved  the  Sermon  on  the 
Mount.  They  have  kept  alive  in  the  earth  its 
highest  conception  of  human  duty  by  making  this 
seem  practical  and  within  ultimate  reach  of  human 
effort.  The  Bible  would  surely  never  have  been 
called  a  revelation  if  it  had  limited  itseK  to  de- 
scribing and  inculcating  a  superhuman  righteousr 
ness.  The  human  race  has  always  had  examples 
of  a  higher  virtue  than  most  of  its  members  were 
willing  to  emulate.  The  New  Testament  justifies 
the  high  esteem  in  which  it  is  held  as  a  source  of 
religious  light,  not  merely  by  furnishing  a  faultless 
ethical  ideal,  but  also,  and  even  chiefly,  by  unveil- 
ing facts  which  bring  that  ideal  within  reach  of 
normal  human  powers.  It  does  not  merely  define 
and  illumine  the  character  of  God,  it  points  out  the 
gradually  ascending  path  by  which  men  may  climb 
to  the  height  of  that  character.  It  draws  attention 
not  merely  to  moral  ends  that  must  be  gained,  but 
also  to  the  ways  and  means  by  which  these  may 
be  compassed.  And  it  is  by  its  dogmas  that  it 
thus  brings  its  ethical  requirements  into  practical 
relation  to  human  ability. 

I  give  to  the  word,  however,  a  wider  meaning 
than  it  generally  suggests.  All  the  teachings  of 
the  gospel  which  are  not  strictly  ethical  I  class  as 


208    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

dogmatic.  The  fatherhood  of  God,  divine  forgive- 
ness, the  promise  of  ultimate  spiritual  success,  be- 
long to  the  same  category  as  the  incarnation  and 
the  atonement.  They  pertain  to  the  philosophy  of 
Christianity  as  distinct  from  its  ethics,  and  may, 
therefore,  properly  be  termed  dogmas. 

Some  of  them  serve  to  enlarge  a  man's  idea  of 
his  own  nature;  all  of  them,  as  has  been  said 
already,  tend  to  diminish  his  sense  of  the  dispro- 
portion existing  between  his  present  powers  and 
the  duties  which  the  gospel  enjoins  upon  him.  The 
doctrine  of  immortality,  or  at  least  a  belief  in  an 
indefinite  prolongation  of  life  beyond  the  grave, 
is  indispensable  to  the  success  of  Christ's  moral 
teachings,  for  it  conveys  the  assurance  that  human 
existence  will  be  long  enough  for  the  completion 
of  the  work  which  they  outline.  No  man  will 
build  an  expensive  house  on  the  surface  of  a  frozen 
pond,  nor  will  he  labor  to  rear  a  perfect  character 
in  a  soul  which  is  doomed  to  melt  away  in  the  nar- 
row space  of  time  which  separates  the  cradle  from 
the  grave.  The  feeling  of  despondency  which  is 
apt  to  influence  even  the  best  men  when  they  dis- 
cover how  slowly  their  moral  ideals  are  being  over- 
taken, which  found  expression  in  Paul's  ^  despairing 
words,  "  The  good  which  I  would  I  do  not :  but  the 
evil  which  I  would  not,  that  I  practice,"  is  likely 
to  be  largely  offset  and  to  be  brought  within 
manageable  limits  by  the  assurance  that,  hard  as 
is  the  task  of  reshaping  the  human  soul  into  the 

^  Romans  yii.  19. 


DOGMATIC   CHRISTIANITY  209 

likeness  of  Christ,  there  is  all  eternity  to  accom- 
plish it  in. 

So,  too,  with  the  doctrine  of  divine  adoption,  the 
dogma  by  faith  in  which  we  cry,  "  Abba,  Father." 
It  expands  a  man,  and  tends  to  remove  all  ap- 
pearance of  preternaturalism  from  the  command- 
ments of  Jesus.  If  these  inculcate  a  conduct  that 
is  divine,  are  they  not  appropriate  to  liim  who  has 
abeady  been  received  into  the  family  of  God? 
Though  it  doth  not  yet  appear  what  he  shall  be, 
ought  there  not  to  be  enough  of  promise  in  his 
new  relation  to  his  Maker  to  render  him  persistent 
and  enthusiastic  in  the  pursuit  of  a  righteousness 
which  will  harmonize  with  his  new  dignity  ?  These 
dogmas,  and  others  that  might  be  classed  with 
them,  —  some  of  which  will  be  examined  more 
particularly  in  later  chapters,  —  have  a  tendency 
to  make  the  highest  ethical  conduct  seem  natural  to 
a  man  because  they  elevate  him,  in  some  measure, 
into  that  spiritual  atmosphere  in  wliich  the  purest 
ethical  ideals  will  seem  at  home. 

The  doctrines  which  have  just  been  named,  and 
more  of  the  same  order,  are  likely  to  undergo  very 
little  alteration  in  their  outward  form ;  but  there 
are  others  which  suffer  many  a  metamorphosis  as 
time  rolls  on,  many  a  change  both  in  philosophical 
interpretation  and  in  literary  statement.  They 
are  like  the  long  sandy  islands  which  skirt  so  much 
of  our  Atlantic  coast,  and  which  mark  the  old 
battle-ground  between  the  rivers  and  the  sea.  Be- 
cause they  have  been  built  up  in  the  conflict,  a 


210    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

shield  has  been  created  behind  which  the  inland 
waters  are  at  rest.  It  has  been  the  fortune  of 
Christianity  to  come  in  collision  with  the  philoso- 
phies and  religions  of  more  than  eighteen  centu- 
ries. To  defend  the  beliefs  which  were  inseparable 
from  its  life  it  has  been  forced  to  enter  the  arena 
of  apologetics.  It  has  fought  for  its  vital  doctrines 
with  whatever  intellectual  weapons  the  times  af- 
forded. As  a  result  many  a  creed  was  banked  up, 
many  a  theological  system  was  framed,  with  no 
more  of  permanence  in  it  than  there  is  in  many  a 
bank  of  sand  which  the  currents  and  the  gales  are 
likely  soon  to  reshape  or  to  carry  elsewhere.  But 
they  achieved  their  purpose.  They  saved  invalu- 
able rehgious  dogmas  from  ruinous  reverses.  Be- 
hind them  were  eternal  truths  which  were  menaced 
by  shifting  phases  of  human  opinion,  and  which 
were  kept  alive  only  by  theological  statements 
that  were  at  times  as  transitory  as  the  views  which 
they  served  to  combat. 

There  are  then  three  elements  in  the  Christian 
religion  :  first,  its  ethical  teachings  ;  second,  the 
theological  facts  which  make  these  practical ;  and 
third,  the  philosophical  interpretations  of  these 
facts  by  which  it  is  sought  to  harmonize  them 
with  various  phases  of  secular  thought.  It  is  only 
the  element  last  named  that  can  undergo  material 
alterations,  and  these  will  be  as  frequent  and 
diverse  as  are  the  changes  in  current  opinion  which 
occasion  them.  As  the  fortifications  of  a  city  may 
be  made  in  turn  of  earth,  stone,  and  iron,  as  their 


DOGMATIC   CHRISTIANITY  211 

location  and  structure  will  be  different  at  different 
times  to  keep  pace  with  improvements  in  ordnance, 
as  the  history  of  the  military  experiences  of  the 
place  may  be  read,  to  some  extent,  in  its  abandoned 
redoubts  and  antiquated  battlements,  so  the  creeds 
and  dogmatic  theories  of  the  Christian  Church 
have  swiftly  succeeded  one  another,  and  doubtless 
have  been  crude  enough  at  times.  They  have 
been  modified  and  transformed  so  often  as  to  have 
become  a  target  for  much  shallow  sarcasm.  But 
they  are  only  the  outworks  that  were  thrown  up  to 
defend  essential  features  of  the  faith  against  ever- 
varying  forms  of  rationalistic  or  heretical  attack. 
The  kernel  of  the  religion,  whether  on  its  ethical 
or  its  doctrinal  side,  has  not  changed.  It  cannot 
change.  The  world  will  never  be  satisfied  with 
a  lower  conception  of  righteousness  than  that  of 
the  New  Testament,  and  a  higher  is  inconceivable. 
But  this  is  so  high  that  it  will  be  abandoned  as  a 
practical  ideal  unless  such  stimulating  doctrines  as 
immortality,  the  atonement,  the  incarnation,  and 
others  shall  be  retained,  at  least  in  their  essen- 
tials, as  objects  of  a  confident  faith.  Christian 
apologetics  may  still  be  expected  to  vary  its  methods 
of  defending  these.  To  the  wornout  creeds  of  the 
past  it  will  add  others  which  will  be  outworn  in 
turn.  The  history  of  doctrine  will  continue  to  be, 
in  the  main,  a  history  of  military  antiquities  in  the 
long  warfare  of  the  church  militant.  And  as  long 
as  the  human  intellect  shall  continue  its  march 
the  defenders  of  the  faith  wiU  find  it  true  that 


212    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

"  Our  little  systems  have  their  day ; 

They  have  their  day  and  cease  to  be  : 
They  are  but  broken  lights  of  thee, 
And  thou,  O  Lord,  art  more  than  they." 

It  is  not  a  little  strange  that  there  are  so  many 
who  fail  to  appreciate  the  magnitude  of  the  debt 
which  Christianity  owes  to  its  doctrines.  It  argues 
some  lack  of  psychological  insight,  some  inability 
to  understand  the  springs  and  motives  of  human 
conduct,  when  it  is  seriously  proposed  to  confine 
the  preaching  of  the  gospel  to  its  moral  teachings, 
to  bring  men  face  to  face  with  the  perfect  ethics 
of  Jesus  without  revealing  to  them  any  way  of 
crossing  the  vast  gulf  which  yawns  between  what 
they  are  and  what  they  are  thus  made  to  see  that 
they  ought  to  be.  The  Jewish  religion  had  its  sac- 
rifices and  its  rites ;  but  even  with  the  aid  of  such 
auxiliaries,  it  was  so  far  from  securing  a  general 
obedience  to  its  elevated  moral  commandments  that 
these  were  lowered,  in  the  end,  to  the  moral  level 
of  the  people  and  almost  disappeared  in  the  quick- 
sands of  rabbinical  theology.  To  expect  that  Chris- 
tianity will  encounter  any  better  fate  if  it  shall 
offer  to  the  world,  in  time  to  come,  nothing  save 
its  sublime  but  discouraging  moral  precepts  is  to 
ignore  ahke  historical  precedent  and  the  rooted 
tendencies  of  human  nature. 

Christianity  owes  its  past  success  and  most  of 
its  present  power  to  the  fact  that  it  appeals  with 
supreme  force  to  two  universal  principles  of  human 
action.     One  of  these  is  the  natural  reverence  of 


DOGMATIC   CHRISTIANITY  213 

the  soul  for  a  high  ethical  example  ;  the  other  is 
the  innate  desire  of  men  for  an  easy  way  to  com- 
pass their  ends.  It  is,  at  the  same  time,  the  hard- 
est and  the  easiest  of  religions.  On  its  ethical 
side,  it  enjoins  a  perfect  holiness,  which  it  has 
exemplified  by  a  faultless  human  character  and 
has  expressed  in  written  laws  or  principles  from 
which  no  jot  or  tittle  can  be  removed ;  on  its  doc- 
trinal side,  it  accords  the  fuU  privileges  of  the 
kingdom  of  God  to  liim  who  has  only  made  a 
beginning  in  the  Christian  life. 

Who  would  have  expected  to  find  in  one  and 
the  same  religion  two  such  contrasted  and  seem- 
ingly irreconcilable  views  of  moral  obligation  as 
are  suggested  in  that  onerous  command  to  the  rich 
young  ruler,  —  "  Go,  sell  whatsoever  thou  hast,  and 
give  to  the  poor,  and  thou  shalt  have  treasure  in 
heaven:  and  come,  follow  me;"  and  in  that  almost 
prodigal  promise  to  a*  crucified  robber,  who  had 
merely  begun  to  emit  a  gleam  of  a  better  purpose, 
— "  To-day  shalt  thou  be  with  me  in  Paradise  "  ? 
Who  would  have  imagined  that  there  would  ever 
have  been  joined  together  in  the  utterances  of  a 
single  reHgious  teacher  such  almost  superhuman 
commands  as,  "  Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God 
with  all  thy  heart,  and  with  all  thy  soul,  and  with 
aU  thy  mind,  and  with  aU  thy  strength,"  "  Thou 
shalt  love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself,"  "Ye  there- 
fore shall  be  perfect,  as  your  heavenly  Father  is 
perfect,"  and  such  indulgent  declarations  as,  "  My 
yoke  is   easy,  and  my  burden  is  light,"  "  Every 


214    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

one  therefore  who  shall  confess  me  before  men, 
him  will  I  also  confess  before  my  Father  which 
is  in  heaven,"  "  Whosoever  shall  give  to  drink 
unto  one  of  these  little  ones  a  cup  of  cold  water 
only,  in  the  name  of  a  disciple,  verily  I  say  unto 
you,  he  shall  in  no  wise  lose  his  reward  "  ?  What 
could  appear  more  self-contradictory,  at  the  first 
glance,  than  the  uncompromising  moral  law  of  the 
gospel  and  the  minute  act  of  obedience  which  con- 
stitutes a  man  a  Christian,  and,  therefore,  an  heir 
of  salvation?  What  could  seem  more  inconsis- 
tent with  itself  than  a  religion  which  proffers  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount  as  the  unalterable  law  of 
human  duty,  and  then  declares,  "  He  that  believ- 
eth  on  me  hath  (already)  everlasting  life  ?  "  What 
theological  expressions  can  be  coined  which  would 
seem  to  be  mutually  more  exclusive  than  salvation 
by  perfect  works  and  salvation  by  imperfect  faith, 
both  of  wliich,  as  shown  in  the  foregoing  quotations 
and  elsewhere  in  the  New  Testament,  represent 
contrasted  sides  of  the  gospel  message  ? 

But  it  is  to  this  combination  of  seemingly  irre- 
concilable features,  to  this  union  of  almost  self- 
contradictory  requirements,  that  the  gospel  owes 
its  power.  The  secret  of  its  age-long  influence 
does  not  consist,  as  some  have  persuaded  them- 
selves, in  the  faultless  purity  of  its  ethics,  nor,  as 
others  of  antinomian  tendencies  tacitly  assume,  in 
a  substitution  of  belief  for  works  of  righteousness, 
but  in  a  fusion  of  both.  The  unapproachable 
holiness  of  its  Founder,  the  ideal  standard  of  vir- 


DOGMATIC   CHRISTIANITY  215 

tue  which  he  inculcated,  the  superhuman  beauty 
of  character  which  he  would  have  men  win,  united 
to  inspire  them  with  a  wholesome  sense  of  their 
own  meagre  moral  attainments,  with  an  enlarged 
conception  of  the  ethical  possibilities  of  human 
nature,  and  with  indefinite  longings  for  the  divine 
life  which  was  thus  brought  within  their  compre- 
hension. But,  on  the  other  hand,  to  forestall  any 
seriously  depressing  or  discouraging  influence  that 
might  be  exerted  upon  them  by  the  contemplation 
of  the  perfect  moral  law,  there  was  furnished,  at 
the  same  time,  a  revelation  of  the  means  by  which 
so  distant  a  moral  goal  can  be  reached,  of  the  rela- 
tive minuteness  of  the  acts  by  which  a  divine  char- 
acter may  be  built  up,  of  the  comparatively  easy 
though  long  pathway  by  which  the  heights  of  a 
perfect  life  can  be  scaled.  It  was  thus  that  the 
ideal  was  made  practical.  The  ethics  of  Christ 
alone  would  have  failed  to  secure  a  widespread 
imitation.  The  easy  conditions  on  which  admit- 
tance to  his  kingdom  was  granted  would  of  them- 
selves have  tended  to  consign  virtue  to  the  remote 
background  of  effort.  But  the  two  united  keep  in 
the  same  field  of  view  ideal  righteousness  and  a 
practical  route  to  it.  They  impose  moral  obliga- 
tions that  are  large  enough  for  children  of  God, 
and  at  the  same  time  smooth  the  path  of  obedi- 
ence by  promises  which  are  suited  to  children  of 
men,  and  which  assure  those  who  are  climbing  it 
that  they  are  already  the  heirs  of  the  salvation. 
Jesus  in  his  conversation  with  Nathanael  seems 


216    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

to  have  identified  himself  with  that  ladder  which 
the  patriarch  saw  in  his  dreams  reaching  from 
earth  to  heaven.  We  ourselves  can  recognize  it  in 
the  twofold  aspect  of  Christianity  which  has  just 
been  presented.  Its  top  rests  against  the  Sermon 
on  the  Mount  illustrated  and  vivified  by  the  per- 
fect life  of  Jesus.  This  is  the  heaven  to  which 
men  are  invited.  It  marks  the  ethical  condition 
which  makes  heaven  possible,  the  standard  of 
righteousness  below  which  there  can  be  no  perma- 
nent satisfaction  for  the  human  conscience.  The 
rungs  which  make  the  ladder  worthy  of  the  name, 
the  successive  steps  in  the  sublime  staircase,  are 
endless  acts  of  obedience  and  self-denial  which  few, 
if  any,  would  have  the  courage  and  patience  to 
persist  in  were  it  not  for  the  promises  and  dec- 
larations of  a  doctrinal  nature  which  Christ  has 
interwoven  with  his  ethical  instructions.  These 
promises  and  declarations  —  to  carry  out  the  figure 
• — may  be  compared  to  the  sides  of  a  ladder. 
Without  them  there  can  be  no  upward  gradation  of 
steps.  They  are  the  source  of  the  faith  which  gives 
men  the  patience  to  climb.  They  bring  an  other- 
wise inaccessible  elevation  of  character  within  reach 
by  making  it  possible  to  divide  the  long  ascent 
into  innumerable  easy  stages  which  are  adapted 
to  the  rudimentary  nature  of  man's  present  moral 
development,  and  at  the  same  time  they  furnish 
in  various  ways,  which  will  be  mentioned  more 
explicitly  hereafter,  the  courage  and  persistence 
which  are  needed  for  so  great  an  undertaking. 


DOGMATIC   CHRISTIANITY  217 

Indeed,  there  is  in  the  gospel  something  analogous 
to  the  mechanical  powers,  and  the  large  success  it 
has  had  in  the  world  is  due  to  its  use  of  a  force 
which  is  comparable  to  that  which  is  exerted  along 
industrial  lines  by  the  wedge,  the  screw,  or  the 
inclined  plane.  I  find,  perhaps,  in  the  path  I  am 
wont  to  pursue,  a  boulder  which  I  wish  were  out 
of  the  way,  but  it  is  too  heavy  for  me  to  move  by 
any  muscular  energy  that  I  have  at  my  command. 
I  ask  myself  if  there  is  not  some  other  way  in 
which  I  can  work  upon  it,  if  there  is  not  some 
method  by  which  I  may  increase  my  strength  while 
dealing  with  it.  It  occurs  to  me  at  once  that  I 
can  use  a  lever.  Accordingly,  I  insert  a  crowbar 
under  it,  and  am  able  at  last  to  roll  it  to  one 
side.  I  realize  that  what  I  have  gained  in  power 
I  have  lost  in  time,  that  I  have  accomplished  by  a 
somewhat  long  and  slow  operation  what  I  would 
have  effected  in  an  instant  if  I  had  only  had  six 
times  my  present  strength;  but  I  have  attained 
my  end. 

Now  Christian  dogma  is  the  lever  by  which 
high  ethical  results  are  accomplished.  The  life  of 
Christ,  the  moral  standard  of  the  gospel,  is  some- 
thing that  is  set  before  man  for  his  imitation.  He 
can  never  be  satisfied  with  himself  or  truthfuUy 
say  that  he  has  fulfilled  his  whole  duty  until  he 
has  lifted  his  conduct  up  to  the  level  thus  revealed 
to  him.  But  he  needs  to  make  only  a  few  at- 
tempts to  do  so  in  order  to  become  convinced  that 
he  has  undertaken  something  beyond  his  strength. 


218    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

What  the  theologians  call  his  "  moral  inability  "  is 
an  impassable  boulder  which  blocks  his  way  to 
the  goal  of  his  highest  spiritual  aspirations.  The 
despairing  cry  of  Paul,  "  O  wretched  man  that  I 
am !  who  shall  deliver  me  out  of  the  body  of  this 
death  ? "  expresses  the  feeling  of  every  one  who 
has  tried  to  lift  himself  by  his  own  native  powers 
to  the  height  of  his  purest  moral  ideals.  It  is  an 
unconscious  appeal  for  something  in  the  realm  of 
spiritual  dynamics  corresponding  to  the  devices  by 
which  force  is  multiplied  in  the  sphere  of  physical 
action. 

Now  doctrinal  Christianity  answers  this  appeal. 
It  furnishes  the  lever  by  which  human  strength  is 
made  equal  to  the  exactions  of  a  cultivated  con- 
science. To  be  sure,  the  law  of  the  mechanical 
powers  holds  good  here  also.  What  is  gained  in 
force  is  lost  in  time.  The  process  thus  inaugurated 
will  be  a  slow  one.  But  this  fact  suggests  the  fun- 
damental distinction  between  law  and  grace^  which 
are  so  often  contrasted  in  the  New  Testament.  The 
practical  value  of  the  doctrine  of  immortality  re- 
sides, as  has  been  said,  partly  in  the  assurance  it 
gives  that  there  wiU  be  time  enough.  Law  by  its 
very  nature  requires  immediate  obedience  to  all  of 
its  commandments,  and  illustrates  the  quickest  way 
of  lifting  the  soul  to  God ;  but  grace  is  willing  to 
wait  until  slower  processes  have  brought  about  the 
same  result ;  while  every  cheering  view  which  the 
gospel  affords  of  God's  attitude  towards  the  human 
race,   every   stimulating  promise    from   the    same 


DOGMATIC  CHRISTIANITY  219 

source  of  divine  assistance  to  the  weak,  of  divine 
patience  with  the  slow,  every  scriptural  declaration 
that  all  barriers  which  may  have  been  conceived 
to  exist  in  the  way  to  the  Father  have  been  re- 
moved, serves  to  augment  the  moral  force  of  men 
and  so  to  bring  them  gradually  to  that  perfect  char- 
acter which  they  are  too  weak  to  attain  at  once. 

Whatever,  therefore,  is  divine  in  the  moral 
teachings  of  Jesus  implies  the  existence  of  as  much 
that  is  divine  in  the  doctrinal  teachings  which 
make  these  practicable.  If  we  are  justified  in  be- 
lieving, on  the  strength  of  considerations  already 
adduced  or  others,  that  our  high  moral  aspirations, 
our  growing  conceptions  of  duty,  are  infused  into 
the  human  mind  by  a  Divine  Being  into  whose 
likeness  man  is  being  gradually  developed,  it  would 
seem  inevitable  that  we  should  refer  to  the  same 
source  the  ideas  of  religious  truth  without  which 
our  ethical  ideals  must  remain  inoperative  and 
barren.  If  we  are  willing  to  concede  that  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount,  the  parable  of  the  Good 
Samaritan,  and  Paul's  chapter  on  Love  deserve 
to  be  regarded  as  having  originated  with  God, 
it  would  scarcely  be  rational  for  us  to  deny  that 
those  dogmas  of  the  Christian  Church  which  have 
influenced  men  to  adopt  these  wonderful  utter- 
ances as  a  reasonable  revelation  of  human  duty 
are  worthy  of  the  same  origin.  As  previously  re- 
marked, we  cannot  suppose  that  God  will  do  things 
by  halves.  It  is  not  consistent  with  our  idea  of  a 
Being  who  is  wise  enough  to  create  a  world  for  us 


220    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

to  believe  that  lie  would  make  known  to  his  crear 
tures  their  supreme  moral  obligations  and  with- 
hold from  them  the  helpful  facts  without  which 
such  ethical  knowledge  would  bring  forth  no  satis- 
factory fruit.  If  the  ends  proposed  are  divine,  so 
must  be  the  means  to  those  ends.  If  the  moral 
standard  is  of  heaven,  so  must  the  doctrines  be 
which  encourage  men  to  emulate  it.  There  can 
be  no  more  of  authority  in  the  human  conscience 
than  there  is  in  the  theological  tenets  which  ren- 
der obedience  to  conscience  possible.  No  greater 
weight  can  attach  to  the  example  of  Jesus  than  to 
the  doctrines  without  which  that  example  is  prac- 
tically useless. 

Plato  wrote  for  a  small  intellectual  aristocracy 
who  could  read  and  understand  him,  but  mankind 
as  a  whole  he  deemed  too  ignorant  to  be  helped  by 
him.  The  Jewish  teachers  at  the  time  of  Christ 
had  likewise  narrowed  their  conception  of  the 
proper  field  of  their  religious  influence  until  it 
embraced  only  those  who  were  familiar  with  the 
rabbinical  writings;  "but  this  multitude  which 
knoweth  not  the  law  are  accursed."  There  seems 
to  be  an  almost  irresistible  tendency  on  the  part  of 
religious  teachers  in  general  to  adapt  their  instruc- 
tions to  the  educated  few  rather  than  to  the  illit- 
erate many,  to  present  the  truth  in  such  a  way  as 
will  meet  the  intellectual  doubts  of  a  smaU  num- 
ber of  thinking  men  rather  than  in  a  manner  that 
will  commend  it  to  the  conscious  spiritual  needs  of 
the  great  bulk  of  hiunanity.     But  a  religion  which 


DOGMATIC   CHRISTIANITY  221 

is  so  propagated  must  prove  a  failure  if  by  reli- 
gious success  we  mean  the  spiritual  elevation  of  the 
whole  human  race.  If  we  believe  that  Christian- 
ity is  in  any  sense  divine,  we  must  feel  that  any 
interpretation  of  it  is  wrong  which  will  necessarily 
confine  its  benefits  to  a  favored  few,  to  the  rela- 
tively small  number  whom  exceptional  mental  or 
moral  gifts  have  lifted  above  the  general  level  of 
their  feUow  men.  Man  can  be  redeemed  only  by 
influences  which  appeal  to  human  nature  as  it  is 
exhibited  in  men  as  a  whole,  and  not  as  it  has  been 
modified  and  improved  in  a  few  individuals. 

There  are  two  ways  in  which  the  average  man 
may  be  excluded  from  the  benefits  of  the  gospel. 
One  of  these  Jesus  had  in  mind  when  he  admin- 
istered that  stern  rebuke  to  the  religious  author- 
ities of  his  time  :  "  Woe  unto  you  lawyers  !  for  ye 
took  away  the  key  of  knowledge :  ye  entered  not 
in  yourselves,  and  them  that  were  entering  in  ye 
hindered."  We  need  only  to  read  "theologians" 
for  "  lawyers  "  — which  would  not  be  a  very  inac- 
curate translation  —  in  order  to  have  our  atten- 
tion forcibly  directed  to  a  common  abuse  of  our 
own  day,  which,  however,  at  least  in  some  quar- 
ters, is  rapidly  becoming  less  and  less  common.  I 
refer  to  the  custom  of  making  assent  to  an  elab- 
orate creed  an  indispensable  condition  of  enroll- 
ment as  a  follower  of  Christ.  It  is  a  custom  akin 
to  the  practice  which  Christ  denounced  in  the  text 
just  given,  —  the  practice  of  putting  the  commen- 
tator on  a  level  with  the  sacred  author  and  inter- 


222    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

posing  the  refracting  atmosphere  of  mere  human 
opinion  between  essential  truth  and  those  who 
desire  to  know  it.  Creeds  are  only  the  spectacles 
which  the  church  wears  to  improve  its  eyesight, 
and  they  must  be  changed  from  time  to  time  to 
suit  alterations  in  its  vision.  They  render  in- 
tellectual-assistance to  the  mind  for  a  while  and 
impart  a  temporary  distinctness  to  important  doc- 
trines, but  as  education  is  sure  to  change  the 
mental  focus,  they  will  obscure  the  truth  after- 
wards if  new  lenses  are  not  used.  The  "  warlike  " 
theory  of  the  atonement  might  have  been  a  useful 
article  of  faith  as  long  as  human  minds  were  dom- 
inated by  the  belief  that  the  souls  of  men  were  in 
the  power  of  an  almost  omnipotent  evil  person- 
ality; but  when  that  belief  had  waned,  to  insist 
upon  it  as  an  essential  part  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
atonement  could  have  had  no  other  effect  than  to 
bring  the  latter  into  doubt. 

And  so  with  philosophical  explanations  of  the 
Trinity  and  other  Christian  dogmas :  they  may  be 
helpful  for  the  time  being ;  but  if  they  are  made 
an  integral  part  of  a  creed,  the  day  is  probably  not 
far  distant  when  they  will  have  become  antiquated, 
and  when  the  distrust  with  which  they  will  then  be 
viewed  will  extend  itself  to  the  truths  which  they 
once  helped  to  illuminate.  A  recognition  of  the 
obligation  to  acquire  the  character  of  Christ  is  the 
only  article  of  faith  to  which  the  church  should 
demand  unqualified  assent.  It  should  not  fail  in 
addition  to  recommend  the  practical  features  of 


DOGMATIC   CHRISTIANITY  223 

the  various  Christian  doctrines  as  indispensable 
aids  to  the  attainment  of  the  ideal  thus  chosen ; 
and  it  can  then  safely  trust  its  earnest  members  to 
adopt  as  many  of  them  as  shall  aid  in  promoting 
their  spiritual  growth.  To  give  to  these  doctrines, 
however,  what  is  intended  for  a  final  statement 
of  their  deepest  meaning,  and  to  insist  that  this 
shall  be  accepted  as  an  essential  part  of  Christian 
faith,  is  not  only  to  put  intellectual  barriers  in  the 
way  of  many  who  would  make  better  Christians 
than  theologians,  but  it  is  also  to  prepare  the  way 
for  future  breaks  between  the  church  and  human 
scholarship.  Creeds  and  commentaries  may  wisely 
be  welcomed  as  aids  to  a  broader  understanding  of 
revealed  truth,  but  only  when  it  is  purposed  that 
they  shaU  not  outlive  their  usefulness. 

There  is  another  way  also  in  which  the  average 
man  may  be  excluded  from  the  benefits  of  the 
gospel,  and  that  is  by  being  confronted  with  his 
full  ethical  obligations  without  receiving  any  intel- 
lectual help  whatever,  or  any  save  what  is  of  the 
feeblest  description.  This  method  is  the  direct 
opposite  of  that  which  has  just  been  described,  and 
has  already  been  considered  in  an  earlier  part  of 
this  chapter.  There  is  something  touching  in  the 
picture  of  a  Robert  Elsmere  working  in  the  slums 
with  ethical  aspirations  but  no  beliefs,  trying  to 
remedy  the  failures  of  Christianity  by  stripping  it 
of  its  most  stimulating  features,  striving  to  elevate 
the  morals  of  outcasts  by  diminishing  the  motives 
to  morality.     It  was  a  correct  instinct  that  led  the 


224    THE   RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

gifted  author  to  describe  the  mission  as  unsuccess- 
ful. The  gates  of  heaven  may  be  barred  against 
men  as  hopelessly  by  moral  commandments  which 
excel  their  moral  powers  as  by  philosophical  creeds 
which  transcend  their  intellectual  capacity.  If  we 
expect  to  find  in  humanity  as  a  whole  that  sym- 
pathy with  the  purest  ethical  ideals,  that  sensitive- 
ness to  the  beauty  of  a  self-sacrificing  character, 
which  is  not  uncommon,  perhaps,  in  the  circles  in 
which  we  move,  we  have  an  exaggerated  conception 
of  the  moral  development  of  the  human  race. 
Such  traits  are  rudimentary  in  mankind  as  a  whole. 
They  are  capable  of  being  indefinitely  expanded  by 
wise  training ;  but  to  urge  upon  men  as  a  rule  of 
conduct  the  example  and  precepts  of  Jesus  apart 
from  all  other  considerations  is  to  ehcit,  in  nine- 
teen cases  out  of  twenty,  an  incredulous  laugh  or 
a  bewildered  stare.  Those  who  would  redeem 
mankind  by  profound  philosophy  and  those  who 
would  save  it  by  bare  ethics  are  equally  unprac- 
tical. They  are  laboring  for  individuals  and  not 
for  the  race. 

Before  the  bolt  which  fastens  the  door  of  a  safe 
can  be  shot  back  several  levers  must  be  moved. 
Each  of  them  is  represented  by  a  letter  in  the 
combination,  and  each  of  them  must  produce  its 
effect  before  the  safe  can  be  ojjened.  No  doubt 
the  portal  of  heaven  must  be  unlocked  by  ideal 
moral  conduct.  To  put  in  practice  the  perfect 
ethics  of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  is  to  force  back 
the  bolt  which  is  all  that  blocks  the  entrance  of  a 


DOGMATIC   CHRISTIANITY  225 

soul  into  a  divine  peace.  But  before  this  can  be 
done,  what  difficulties  must  be  overcome,  what  hin- 
drances must  be  taken  out  of  the  way  !  What 
hopes  must  be  excited  and  what  fears  allayed, 
what  views  of  God  must  be  embraced  and  what 
new  ideas  of  life  must  be  conceived,  before  a  selfish 
nature  will  aspire  to  become  divine !  These  hopes, 
views,  ideas,  represent  the  levers  which  dogmatic 
Christianity  seeks  to  move.  The  doctrines  are  the 
combination  which  opens  the  safe,  the  correlated 
truths  which  must  be  brought  to  bear  upon  the  soul 
before  the  highest  ethical  motive  can  be  set  to  work. 
When  Christ  said  to  Peter,  "  I  will  give  unto 
thee  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,"  he  was 
not  promising  the  disciple  a  primacy  among  his 
fellows  ;  for  that  is  something  which  Peter  evi- 
dently never  possessed.  Nor  is  it  likely  that  he 
was  merely  indicating  that  Peter  would  be  the  first 
to  preach  the  gospel  to  the  Gentiles  ;  for  the  fact 
that  the  latter  was  only  to  begin  a  work  which  was 
really  to  fall  to  the  province  of  a  much  abler  man 
would  hardly  seem  important  enough  to  match  the 
impressive  language  of  the  promise.  It  is  more 
probable  that  the  profoundly  figurative  style  of 
teaching  which  Jesus  so  often  adopted,  and  which 
finds  its  most  conspicuous  illustrations  in  the  para- 
bles and  the  miracles,  is  to  be  recognized  here  also. 
We  shall  be  in  harmony  with  the  spirit  of  his 
method  as  it  is  exhibited  in  many  of  his  deepest 
utterances  and  works,  if  we  see  in  the  words  we 
are  now  considering  a  reference  to  the  inspiring 


226    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

truths  with  which  the  disciple  was  to  be  equipped 
for  his  mission,  and  by  which  he  would  be  able  to 
open  human  hearts  to  ethical  influences  as  they 
had  never  been  opened  before  by  any  agency  that 
had  been  used  for  the  reformation  of  man.  If  such 
was  the  significance  of  the  keys,  they  were  a  gift 
to  the  whole  church.  As  the  power  to  bind  and 
to  loose,  which  was  also  bestowed  on  Peter  at  this 
time,  was,  on  another  occasion,  granted  to  the  dis- 
ciples as  a  whole,^  so  we  may  beheve  that  in  the 
religious  doctrines  which  have  become  inseparable 
from  the  moral  teachings  of  the  gospel,  in  the  in- 
spiring facts  which  associate  the  ethics  of  Christian- 
ity with  aU  that  human  nature  needs  in  the  way  of 
encouragement  and  hope,  we  have  the  golden  keys 
of  which  Peter,  indeed,  was  to  be  the  first  to  learn 
the  use,  but  which,  in  the  hands  of  countless  Chris- 
tian preachers  and  teachers,  were  to  unlock  the 
kingdom  of  heaven  for  millions  of  men  and  women, 
in  every  age,  in  every  chme,  who  would  need  to 
know  that  the  portal  could  really  be  opened  before 
they  would  have  the  courage  to  spend  a  life,  and 
perhaps  more  than  a  life,  in  the  pursuit  of  a  per- 
fect moral  ideal. 

Nor  should  the  fact  be  overlooked  in  this  con- 
nection that  virtue  is  increased  not  only  by  ap- 
proximating to  our  ideals  of  conduct  but  also  by 
enlarging  our  own  nature.  A  man  with  grand 
beliefs  is  likely  to  be  a  grander  man  than  one  who 
is  without  them.     The  perfect  righteousness  of  a 

«-  1  Matthew  xviii.  18. 


DOGMATIC  CHRISTIANITY  227 

great  man  is,  in  a  certain  sense,  greater  than  the 
perfect  righteousness  of  one  less  able :  it  involves 
the  consecration  of  vaster  powers  to  the  noblest 
ends.  The  higher  one's  conception  of  his  essen- 
tial dignity  becomes,  the  loftier  and  broader  his 
ambitions  are  apt  to  be ;  and  it  is  the  ambitions 
of  a  soul  that  measure  its  intrinsic  value.  So 
Paul  seems  to  teach  when  he  declares  that  God 
will  render  eternal  hfe  unto  them  that  seek  for 
glory  and  honor  and  incorruption.  The  very  large- 
ness of  the  ends  they  are  pursuing  makes  them  fit 
recipients  of  prizes  of  the  same  order. 

That  one  who  deems  himself  a  son  of  God,  an 
heir  of  immortality,  a  future  companion  of  the  just 
made  perfect  and  of  an  innumerable  company  of 
angels,  should  be  capable  of  higher  aspirations  and 
a  more  subhme  character  than  one  who  deems  him- 
self but  the  king  of  beasts  and  the  quintessence  of 
dust  would  seem  beyond  dispute.  The  unexampled 
achievements  of  Christian  civilization  are  those  of 
men  who  were  made  equal  to  vast  exploits  by  a 
deep  sense  of  their  immortality  and  of  their  kin- 
ship with  God.  Jesus  alludes  to  the  fact  I  am 
considering  when  he  says :  "  Verily  I  say  unto  you, 
Amone:  them  that  are  born  of  women  there  hath 
not  arisen  a  greater  than  John  the  Baptist :  yet  he 
that  is  but  little  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  greater 
than  he."  The  forerunner  of  the  Messiah  was  the 
product  of  a  relatively  narrow  religion,  and  even 
the  humblest  Christian  who  had  caught  a  glimpse 
of  his  own  intrinsic  majesty,  and  of  his  privileges 


228    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

as  a  member  of  the  heavenly  kingdom  and  as  a  joint 
heir  with  Christ  of  an  incorruptible  inheritance, 
had  expanded  his  soid  far  beyond  the  dimensions 
attained  by  any  one  with  less  inspiring  beliefs.  As 
the  most  obscure  American  who  appreciates  his 
birthright  will  feel  that  he  is  superior  to  the  most 
powerful  barbarian  king,  so  the  sublime  beliefs 
which  Christianity  has  made  the  common  property 
of  a  large  portion  of  the  human  race  impart  to 
even  the  obscurest  disciple  a  greatness  which  sur- 
passes, in  some  respects,  that  of  the  greatest  heir 
of  a  lesser  faith.  It  is  because  the  doctrines  of 
the  Christian  religion  enlarge  human  nature  while 
they  purify  it,  because  they  broaden  the  virtue 
of  men  while  they  perfect  it,  that  they  have  earned 
an  additional  and  special  right  to  be  reckoned 
among  the  most  powerful  ethical  influences  ever 
brought  to  bear  on  human  character,  and  to  be 
associated,  in  practice,  with  the  moral  teachings  of 
Jesus  as  an  inseparable  part  of  a  divine  revelation. 
The  Christian  dogmas,  therefore,  are  an  integral 
part  of  the  religion  of  Christ.  They  cannot  be 
separated  from  it  without  destroying  much  of  the 
value  of  what  remains.  The  successive  modifi- 
cations which  have  occurred  in  the  explanations 
that  have  been  given  of  them  are  not  inconsistent 
with  their  fundamental  truth,  but  rather  emphasize 
it  by  illustrating  its  adaptedness  to  the  shifting 
phases  of  developing  religious  thought.  When, 
therefore,  we  consider,  in  addition  to  what  has 
already  been  said,  that  the  essence  of  these  doc- 


DOGMATIC   CHRISTIANITY  229 

trines  is  derived  from  the  utterances  of  men  who 
represent  the  culmination  of  Hebrew  inspiration, 
of  men  who  may  be  justly  regarded  as  expressing 
the  final  results  of  the  most  extensive  and  most 
truly  scientific  theological  and  religious  induction 
that  has  ever  been  made  by  a  single  race,  we  can- 
not but  accord  to  them  a  peculiar  respect,  and  in- 
dulge the  confident  expectation  of  finding  in  them 
some  of  the  most  stimulating  and  helpful  revela- 
tions that  God  has  given  to  men. 


CHAPTER  IX 

THE   mCAKNATION 

The  influence  of  good  example  has  been  a  very- 
potent  agency  in  the  ethical  development  of  the 
human  race.  Individuals  are  ever  lifting  them- 
selves above  the  moral  level  of  their  fellow  men, 
and  the  higher  standards  of  conduct  which  are 
thus  exemplified  beget  in  others  a  desire  to  equal 
them.  And  this  is  especially  true  when  the  ex- 
ample is  one  of  philanthropic  self-sacrifice.  It 
would  be  impossible  to  overestimate  the  effect 
which  the  unselfish  patriotism  of  Wasliington  has 
had  on  the  character  of  the  Aonerican  people. 
Doubtless  the  disinterested  conduct  of  Moses,  as 
portrayed  by  the  Jewish  historian  and  psalmist, 
did  much  to  elevate  the  moral  ideals  of  his  coun- 
trymen. The  early  legends  of  various  peoples  re- 
count the  self-sacrificing  labors  of  certain  mythical 
or  half -historical  benefactors  whose  lives  were  spent 
in  the  service  of  others,  and  whose  names,  conse- 
quently, keep  before  the  popular  mind  a  more  or 
less  high  conception  of  moral  obligation  and  of  the 
possibilities  of  altruistic  conduct.  It  is  as  true  in 
ethics  as  it  is  in  any  other  field  of  human  action  that 
men,  as  a  rule,  can  be  led  to  the   summit  of  any 


THE  INCARNATION  231 

difficult  achievement  only  by  those  who  are  leaders 
in  the  true  sense  of  the  word,  by  those,  that  is,  who 
first  lieroically  climb  the  slopes  themselves.  Self- 
sacrifice  is  the  decisive  test  and  the  most  winning 
expression  of  love  ;  and  a  rehgion  which  exempli- 
fies the  highest  self-sacrifice  is  the  one  which  will 
exert,  in  the  long  run,  the  most  powerful  leverage 
on  the  human  mind  and,  other  things  being  equal, 
reap  the  largest  success  in  the  end. 

Any  one  who  reads  Edwin  Arnold's  poem,  "  The 
Light  of  Asia,"  must  feel  very  powerfully  drawn 
towards  the  character  of  Gautama  as  there  por- 
trayed. The  self-denying  philanthropy  of  a  young 
prince  who  was  in  possession  of  all  things  which 
men  generally  regard  as  most  desirable,  and  who 
could  confidently  look  forward  to  a  life  filled  with 
delights  which  are  far  beyond  the  reach  of  aU  save 
a  favored  few,  but  who  gave  up  wealth,  power, 
position,  and  domestic  happiness  in  order  to  solve 
the  problem  of  human  pain  and  misery,  who  ex- 
changed the  robes  of  royalty  for  the  beggar's  garb 
that  he  might  mitigate  the  suffering  of  his  fellow 
men,  —  such  an  act  of  self-sacrifice,  if  it  is  be- 
lieved by  the  Buddhist  to  have  been  performed  by 
the  founder  of  his  religion,  must  inspire  him  with 
a  peculiar  interest  and  confidence  in  that  religion. 
The  cult  wiU  be  glorified  by  the  transcendent  love 
which  is  ascribed  to  him  who  originated  it.  It  will 
be  clothed  in  the  eyes  of  its  adherents  with  all  the 
prestige  that  naturally  attaches  itself  to  philan- 
thropic movements  which   embody  the  results  of 


232    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

much  disinterested  study  and  many  self-denying 
experiences. 

It  would  seem,  therefore,  that  the  character  of 
God  must  be  associated  with  something  of  the 
same  nature,  if  he  is  to  be  worshiped  with  en- 
thusiasm and  affectionate  devotion,  if  it  is  not  to 
be  said  with  truth  that  in  the  hold  which  has  been 
secured  on  men  by  many  of  their  human  benefac- 
tors there  is  something  more  tenacious  and  effec- 
tive than  can  ever  enter  into  the  attachment  of  a 
man  to  his  Maker.  It  would  seem  to  be  indispen- 
sable that  the  quality  of  seK-sacrifice  should  appear 
conspicuously  among  the  moral  traits  of  the  Al- 
mighty, if  the  Creator  is  ever  to  become  the  object 
of  a  more  intense  devotion  than  is  accorded  to  some 
of  the  best  of  his  creatures. 

Now  it  is  precisely  this  quality  of  the  Infinite 
that  natural  religion  does  not  adequately  reveal. 
The  theist  can  discover  the  power  and  wisdom  of 
God  in  his  works.  He  can  deduce  most  of  the 
moral  attributes  of  the  Most  High,  with  more  or 
less  of  confidence,  from  natural  phenomena.  The 
love  and  the  benevolence  of  the  Deity  have  been 
apprehended,  in  some  measure,  even  by  pagan 
minds.  These  qualities  are  well  calculated  to  in- 
spire awe,  reverence,  and  even  some  degree  of  af- 
fection. But  there  is  one  kind  of  affection  which 
they  wiU  not  beget.  There  is  nothing  in  them  to 
call  forth  the  love  which  goes  out  to  one  who  has 
himself  loved  with  a  self-forgetful  devotion  that 
shrank  not  from  the  most  terrible  ordeal,  that  was 


THE  INCARNATION  233 

proof  against  aU  danger  and  all  suffering.  The 
conclusion  would  seem  to  be  irresistible  that  if  God 
is  ever  to  win  from  the  human  race  an  expression 
of  its  highest  gratitude,  a  worship  which  will  lack 
no  element  of  the  highest  conceivable  personal  con- 
secration, his  wisdom  must  devise  some  means  by 
which  he  can  withdraw  from  that  state  of  being  in 
which  he  is  beyond  the  reach  of  pain  and  trial  and 
enter  into  a  condition  of  finite  limitations  in  which 
it  wiU  be  possible  for  him  to  exhibit  seH-sacrifice 
because  it  will  be  possible  for  him  to  undergo  suf- 
fering. And  is  it  not  true  that  the  affection,  the 
intense  loyalty,  which  the  Christian  feels  towards 
his  Maker  is  very  largely  due  to  the  fact  that  he 
has  been  taught  to  believe  that  the  greatest  sacri- 
fice of  which  love  is  capable  has  been  made  by 
God  himself  ?  Is  it  not  equally  true  that  the  dis- 
ciple of  Jesus  would  feel  somewhat  abashed  by  the 
self-abnegation  of  a  Gautama  were  he  not  able  to 
set  over  against  it,  not  merely  the  self-sacrifice  of 
a  humble  Galilean  carpenter,  whose  labor  of  love 
might  be  said  to  have  involved  no  abandonment 
of  previous  ease  and  comfort,  to  have  received  even 
a  substantial  reward  in  the  shape  of  an  enhanced 
personal  and  social  dignity,  but  also  such  a  sub- 
lime allegation  as  is  set  forth  in  the  text :  "  Who, 
being  in  the  form  of  God,  counted  it  not  a  prize 
to  be  on  an  equality  with  God,  but  emptied  him- 
seK,  taking  the  form  of  a  servant,  being  made  in 
the  likeness  of  men ;  and  being  found  in  fashion 
as  a  man,  he  humbled  himself,  becoming  obedient 
even  unto  death,  yea,  the  death  of  the  cross." 


234    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

That  the  spirit  of  self-sacrifice  is  an  element  of 
the  divine  character  may  indeed  be  inferred  from 
the  fact  that  it  has  shown  itself  from  time  immemo- 
rial in  human  nature,  and  is  therefore  presumably 
one  of  the  ethical  qualities  that  man  is  deriving 
from  the  parent  Mind.  There  is  a  vast  difference, 
however,  in  respect  to  stimulating  power  and  win- 
ning influence  between  a  potential  and  an  actual 
beneficence.  The  world  loves,  not  those  who  would 
sacrifice  themselves  for  others  if  they  could  find 
an  opportunity,  but  those  who  have  found  one  and 
used  it.  Between  a  character  which  is  said  to  be 
capable  of  self-denial  for  others  and  one  which 
has  exhibited  it  there  is  all  the  difference  in  re- 
spect to  impressiveness  and  the  power  to  excite 
imitation  that  there  is  between  precept  and  exam- 
ple. It  would  seem  to  be  certain,  therefore,  that 
God  must  manifest  a  love  which  can  be  believed 
to  have  cost  him  supreme  self-forgetfulness  and 
privation  if  he  is  to  receive  from  men  the  highest 
quality  of  devotion  which  human  nature  is  able  to 
evince.  As  the  complexion  of  love  is  largely  de- 
termined by  the  personal  traits  of  those  who  elicit 
it,  the  command  to  love  God  with  heart  and  soul 
and  mind  and  strength,  to  render  to  him,  that 
is,  an  affection  which  is  lacking  in  no  element 
of  completeness,  would  appear  incapable  of  being 
obeyed  unless  self-sacrifice  can  be  shown  to  have 
entered  into  God's  dealings  with  men.  In  this 
fact  we  have  one  of  the  "  knots  "  to  which  refer- 
ence  has  already  been  made  ^  and   in  the  exist- 

1  Chap.  V. 


THE  INCARNATION  235 

ence  of  which  we  find  a  foreshadowing  of  the  mir- 
acle. For  the  presence  of  such  a  need  in  a  world 
governed  by  such  a  Being  as  we  hold  God  to  be  is 
itself  a  prophecy.  It  justifies  the  expectation  that 
divine  knowledge  and  goodness  combined  will  dis- 
cover a  fitting  way  to  meet  it. 

The  Gentile  world  had  its  seers  and  its  inspira- 
tion as  well  as  the  Jewish  race.  The  consciousness 
of  an  inability  to  solve  moral  problems  which  finds 
expression  in  the  prediction  ascribed  to  Moses  that 
another  teacher  would  supplement  his  work,  which 
moved  John  the  Baptist  to  direct  his  disciples  to 
a  greater  than  himself  who  was  close  behind  him, 
is  paralleled  in  the  expectations  of  Confucius  and 
Zoroaster  that  a  larger  revelation  of  the  truth  than 
they  could  give  was  yet  to  be  furnished  to  the 
world.  The  despair  of  Tacitus  when  he  declared 
that  human  life  was  one  great  farce  and  expressed 
the  conviction  that  the  Roman  world  lay  mider 
some  terrible  curse,  the  feelings  of  Cicero  when 
he  pictured  the  enthusiasm  which  would  greet  the 
embodiment  of  true  virtue  should  it  ever  appear 
on  earth,  the  longing  of  Seneca  for  some  hand 
from  without  to  lift  humanity  out  of  the  ruin  of 
despair,  are  echoes  from  the  very  century  in  the 
midst  of  which  Christ  died,  and  ought  to  have  pre- 
pared any  mind  with  an  adequate  conception  of 
God  for  some  remarkable  providence.  The  mys- 
tery of  human  iniquity,  the  failure  of  all  known 
forces  and  influences  to  effect  the  reformation  of 
men,  that  sense  of  superhuman  difficulty  which 


236    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

found  expression  in  the  text,^  "  WMcli  tilings  angels 
desire  to  look  into,"  were  prophetic  of  great  events. 
Man's  extremity  is  God's  opportunity.  In  other 
words,  when  the  problem  of  human  life  becomes 
too  hard  for  the  human  race  collectively  or  through 
the  medium  of  its  wisest  minds  to  solve,  in  that 
very  fact  is  to  be  recognized  a  prediction  of  and 
a  preparation  for  a  new  gift  of  divine  light  to  the 
world. 

And  another  need,  associated  with  if  not  involved 
in  the  one  just  described,  is  that  of  divine  com- 
panionship. There  is  something  discouraging  to 
the  average  mind  in  the  thought  of  the  gulf  which 
separates  the  finite  from  the  infinite.  The  enjoy- 
ment felt  by  the  child  in  the  society  of  its  father, 
the  encouragement  which  the  private  soldier  derives 
from  any  friendliness  shown  him  by  his  commander- 
in-chief,  the  loyal  devotion  with  which  a  peasant 
is  inspired  when  he  becomes  an  object  of  kindly 
interest  to  his  sovereign,  are  repeated  and  enlarged 
in  the  experiences  of  those  who  believe  that  God 
has  entered  into  personal  relations  with  them  and 
has  not  felt  too  far  above  them  to  make  himself 
one  of  them.  The  theophanies,  the  manifestations 
of  divine  beings  in  human  form,  which  are  described 
in  pagan  literature  as  well  as  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, are  to  him  who  has  an  exalted  idea  of  God's 
benevolence  only  so  many  prophetic  intimations  of 
coming  events.  In  whatever  way  these  stories 
may  have  originated,  they  bear  witness  to  the  exist- 

1  1  Peter  i.  12. 


THE   INCARNATION  237 

ence  of  a  desire,  a  craving,  on  the  part  of  men 
for  divine  society.  The  myths,  the  legends,  the 
religious  theories  of  mankind,  have  a  psychological 
bearing  which  entitles  them  to  much  respect.  It 
is  no  objection  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Incarnation 
to  say  that  it  can  be  classed  with  them.  They 
represent  the  strivings  of  the  collective  human 
mind  after  religious  truth.  They  reflect  a  world- 
wide mental  condition,  and  therefore  shed  an  indis- 
pensable light  on  the  problems  which  a  religion 
must  solve,  on  the  facts  of  human  nature  with 
which  it  must  harmonize,  if  it  is  to  be  successful 
and  universal.  In  a  word,  they  show  the  way  in 
which  God  must  come  to  men  in  order  to  win  them. 

It  is  important  for  us  to  understand  in  just 
what  light  Jesus  was  regarded  by  those  who  first 
preached  his  gospel,  how  the  mystery  of  his  per- 
son and  life  was  solved  by  that  inspiration  which 
has  given  us  the  New  Testament.  We  cannot  but 
attach  great  value  to  the  utterances  made  on  this 
subject  by  a  people  like  the  Hebrews,  who  are 
acknowledged  to  speak  with  peculiar  authority  on 
religious  questions,  and  whose  prophetic  deliver- 
ances, if  we  are  to  judge  them  by  their  effects, 
never  reached  a  higher  spiritual  level  than  is  repre- 
sented by  the  literature  of  the  New  Testament. 
If  it  is  possible  to  determine  the  meaning  of  an 
author  from  liis  writings,^  it  can  hardly  be  denied 
that  the  New  Testament  teaches  as  plainly  that 
Christ  is  God  as  that  there  is  a  God. 

It  would  evidently  be  beyond  the  scope  of  the 


238    THE   RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

present  volume  to  give  even  a  brief  resume  of  the 
controversy  whicli  has  been  waged  in  reference  to 
the  person  of  Christ  between  different  sections  of 
the  Christian  Church.  Nor  could  I  hope  to  inter- 
est the  general  reader  in  the  exegetical  hair-split- 
ting of  which  much  of  this  controversy  consists. 
It  is  possible,  however,  to  summarize  the  utter- 
ances of  the  Scriptures  on  this  point  in  such  a 
way  as  to  show  that  the  conclusion  with  which  the 
last  paragraph  ends  is  abundantly  warranted.  If 
we  interpret  the  language  of  the  sacred  writers  in 
reference  to  the  needs  of  those  for  whom  they 
wrote,  and  read  in  it  the  meaning  it  must  obvi- 
ously have  had  for  men  and  women  who  were  not 
metaphysicians  but  plain  people  in  want  of  plain 
instruction,  there  can  scarcely  be  two  opinions  as 
to  its  teachings  on  this  point. 

What  is  the  Biblical  idea  of  God  ?  It  is  that 
of  a  Being  of  whom  certain  acts,  attributes,  quali- 
ties, etc.,  are  distinctively  characteristic  ;  that  is, 
they  belong  to  him  and  to  no  other  being.  We 
know  no  one  save  through  certain  peculiarities 
which  individually  or  collectively  pertain  to  him 
alone.  We  recognize  a  friend  by  his  looks,  his 
bearing,  the  tone  of  his  voice,  his  customary  ex- 
pressions. If  these  are  not  observable,  we  know 
him  no  longer.  If  an  intimate  acquaintance  should 
appear  before  us  with  his  face  hidden  by  a  mask, 
his  familiar  garments  covered  by  a  domino,  and 
with  his  voice  disguised,  we  should  take  him  for  a 
stranger.     We  should  be  able  to  see  in  him  none 


THE  INCARNATION  239 

of  the  distinguishing  marks  by  which  we  have  been 
wont  to  recognize  him,  and  therefore  we  must  fail 
to  identify  him. 

So  when  a  well-known  historical  personage  is 
introduced  into  a  work  of  fiction  under  an  assmned 
name,  if  we  are  able  to  penetrate  his  disguise  it  is 
by  detecting  in  him  some  of  the  quahties  which 
we  associate  with  that  personage.  We  easily  rec- 
ognize in  the  nameless  "  Black  Knight  "  of  "  Ivan- 
hoe  "  King  Richard  the  First  of  England,  for 
his  immense  strength,  the  device  upon  his  shield, 
when  combined  with  various  other  circumstances, 
can  be  referred  only  to  that  monarch.  So  our 
idea  of  any  person  whom  we  have  never  seen  is 
derived  entirely  from  description,  from  certain 
acts,  qualities,  characteristics  which  we  have  been 
taught  to  connect  with  him  alone,  and  apart  from 
which  it  would  be  impossible  for  us  to  form  any 
idea  of  him  whatever. 

Now  we  get  our  conception  of  God  in  the  same 
way.  We  could  not  form  one  intelligently  save 
by  putting  together  certain  characteristics  which 
we  have  learned  from  nature  or  the  Bible  to  refer 
to  him  alone.  We  ^  our  thoughts  on  these,  and 
they  unite  in  producing  a  certain  mental  image 
or  concept  which  is  our  idea  of  God.  Without 
them  it  would  be  no  more  possible  to  think  of  God 
than  it  would  be  for  a  person  who  had  been  born 
blind  to  form  a  correct  notion  of  color. 

What,  then,  are  the  characteristics  which  the 
Bible  ascribes  to  God  by  means  of  which  we  are 


240    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

able  to  identify  him,  to  distinguish  him  from  the 
gods  of  the  pagan  cults  ?  I  will  enumerate  some 
of  the  most  important  of  them,  and  at  the  same 
time  cite  the  texts  in  which  they  are  mentioned. 

1.  Creation  is  declared  to  be  an  act  peculiar  to 
God.  "  Thus  saith  the  Lord,  ...  I  am  the  Lord, 
that  maketh  all  things ;  that  stretcheth  forth  the 
heavens  alone ;  that  spreadeth  abroad  the  earth ; 
who  is  with  me  ?  "  (margin  :  by  myself).  (Isaiah 
xliv.  24.) 

2.  He  is  the  preserver  of  all  things.  "  Thou 
art  the  Lord,  even  thou  alone ;  thou  hast  made 
heaven,  the  heaven  of  heavens,  with  all  their  host, 
the  earth  and  all  things  that  are  thereon,  the  seas 
and  all  that  is  in  them,  and  thou  preservest  them 
all."    (Nehemiah  ix.  6.) 

3.  He  is  omnipotent.  "  The  Lord  appeared  to 
Abram,  and  said  unto  him,  I  am  God  Almighty." 
(Genesis  xvii.  1.) 

So  in  nine  different  books  of  the  Old  Testament 
the  same  title  is  given  to  Jehovah.  The  Hebrew 
word  translated  Almighty  (^sJiaddai)  occurs  in  no 
other  connection. 

4.  He  is  omnipresent. 

"  Whither  shall  I  go  from  thy  spirit  ? 
Or  whither  shall  I  flee  from  thy  presence  ? 
If  I  ascend  up  into  heaven,  thou  art  there  ; 
If  I  make  my  bed  in  Sheol,  behold  thou  art  there. 
If  I  take  the  wings  of  the  morning, 
And  dwell  in  the  uttermost  parts  of  the  sea  ; 
Even  there  shall  thy  hand  lead  me. 
And  thy  right  hand  shall  hold  me." 

(Psalms  cxxxix.  7-10.) 


THE  INCARNATION  241 

5.  He  is  immutable.  "Every  good  gift  and 
every  perfect  boon  is  from  above,  coming  down 
from  the  Father  of  h'ghts,  with  whom  can  be  no 
variation,  neither  shadow  that  is  cast  by  turning." 
(James  i.  17.)  "  For  I  the  Lord  change  not." 
(Malachi  iii.  6.) 

6.  He  is  eternal. 

"  Before  the  mountains  were  brought  forth, 
Or  ever  thou  hadst  formed  the  earth  and  the  world, 
Even  from  everlasting  to  everlasting,  thou  art  God." 

(Psalms  xc.  2.) 

7.  He  is  an  infaUible  judge  of  human  thoughts 
and  motives.  "  The  heart  is  deceitful  above  all 
things,  and  it  is  desperately  sick  :  who  can  know 
it  ?  I  the  Lord  search  the  heart,  I  try  the  reins, 
even  to  give  every  man  according  to  his  ways,  ac- 
cording to  the  fruit  of  his  doings."  (Jeremiah 
xvii.  9,  10.) 

8.  He  is  the  sole  object  of  adoration.  "  Thou 
shalt  worship  the  Lord  thy  God,  and  him  only 
shalt  thou  serve."     (Matthew  iv.  10.) 

Here,  then,  we  have  the  character  of  God  pre- 
sented to  us  in  the  Bible  in  eight  different  aspects. 
Others  might  be  added,  but  these  wiU  suffice. 
Creation  is  ascribed  to  him  in  such  a  way  as  to  ex- 
clude the  agency  of  any  other  being.  The  omni- 
potence attributed  to  him  is  evidently  regarded  as 
belonging  to  him  alone.  So  all  of  the  remaining 
characteristics  were  viewed  by  the  Hebrews  as  dis- 
tinctively divine  and  as  referable  only  to  Jehovah. 
Whenever,  therefore,  a  being  is  referred  to  in  the 


242    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

Bible  as  a  creator,  we  cannot  doubt  tbat  God  is 
intended  ;  and  even  more  certain  must  we  be,  if 
sucb  a  thing  were  possible,  that  God  is  meant 
when  a  person  is  named  as  j)ossessing  many  or 
even  all  of  the  characteristics  which  the  Scriptures 
have  taught  us  to  associate  with  God  alone. 

I  have  in  mind,  for  example,  a  certain  monu- 
ment in  Boston  which  I  may  describe  as  being 
221  feet  high,  as  standing  on  Bunker  Hill,  as 
having  been  erected  to  commemorate  a  battle,  and 
as  being  taller  than  any  other  structure  of  the 
kind  in  the  city.  If,  therefore,  I  am  told  that 
there  is  on  Breed's  Hill  in  Boston  a  granite  shaft 
221  feet  in  height,  which  commemorates  a  battle 
of  the  Revolutionary  War  and  is  the  loftiest 
monument  in  New  England,  I  am  at  no  loss  to 
identify  the  object  my  informant  is  speaking  of  as 
the  same  that  I  have  in  mind,  notwithstanding  the 
difference  in  the  name  of  the  hill.  I  know  that 
there  cannot  be  two  monuments  each  of  which  is 
higher  than  the  other.  All  of  the  characteristics 
which  he  has  enumerated  cannot  by  any  possibil- 
ity belong  to  two  different  structures.  If  he  is  a 
perfectly  trustworthy  person,  I  have  no  doubt 
whatever  that  we  have  both  been  describing  the 
same  object,  and  that  the  apparent  disagreement 
between  us  is  due  to  some  historical  fact  which 
has  led  him  to  give  the  name  of  Breed's  Hill  to 
what  I  have  called  Bunker  Hill. 

Or  to  give  another  illustration :  A  foreigner 
may  be  informed  that  Ulysses  S.  Grant  directed 


THE  INCARNATION  243 

the  movements  of  the  army  of  the  Potomac  in 
the  latter  part  of  our  civil  war,  that  he  cap- 
tured Vicksburg,  and,  as  commander-in-chief  of 
the  Union  forces,  received  the  surrender  of  Lee's 
army.  The  man  may  subsequently  be  informed 
that  Hiram  U.  Grant  was  the  last  leader  of  the 
Potomac  army,  that  it  was  his  generalship  that 
brought  about  the  faU  of  Vicksburg,  and  that 
he  was  commander-in-chief  when  Lee  laid  down 
his  arms.  The  person  to  whom  these  seemingly 
contradictory  statements  have  been  made  will  not 
doubt,  if  they  come  from  reliable  sources,  that  the 
same  officer  is  referred  to  in  both  of  them.  The 
exploits  which  each  is  said  to  have  performed  are 
related  with  such  attendant  circumstances  that 
they  cannot  be  supposed  to  have  been  achieved  by 
more  than  one  military  commander.  He  will 
naturally  conclude  —  what  was  actually  the  case 
—  that  Ulysses  S.  Grant  had  also  been  called 
Hiram  U.  Grant. 

So  the  Biblical  idea  of  God  is  that  of  a  Being 
who  created  the  world,  who  preserves  it,  and  so  on. 
To  whatever  Being,  therefore,  the  sacred  writings 
ascribe  the  acts  and  traits  which  they  have  already 
used  to  convey  to  us  a  distinct  conception  of  God, 
we  cannot  but  be  certain  that  by  that  Being,  what- 
ever name  they  give  to  him,  God  is  meant.  Now 
all  the  characteristics  which  I  have  just  mentioned 
as  unitmg  to  form  the  Biblical  idea  of  God  the 
New  Testament  also  ascribes  to  Jesus  Christ. 

1.  Christ   is   said   to  have   created   the  world. 


244    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

"  Who  is  the  image  of  the  invisible  God,  the  first- 
born of  all  creation ;  for  in  him  were  all  things 
created,  in  the  heavens  and  upon  the  earth,  things 
visible  and  things  invisible,  whether  thrones  or 
dominions  or  principalities  or  powers ;  all  things 
have  been  created  through  him,  and  unto  him ; 
and  he  is  before  all  things,  and  in  him  all  thmgs 
consist."      (Colossians  i.  15-18.) 

See,  also,  the  creative  acts  attributed  to  the 
Logos  in  the  first  chapter  of  the  Fourth  Gospel. 

I  am  aware  that  there  are  those  who  insist 
that  a  distinction  should  be  made  in  this  con- 
nection between  the  prepositions  hy  and  through 
(or,  in  Greek,  between  viro  with  the  genitive,  on 
the  one  hand,  and  8ia  with  the  genitive,  on  the 
other)  ;  but,  in  view  of  the  fact  that  the  creation  is 
ascribed  in  the  Old  Testament  to  God  alone  (see 
text  above  quoted),  that  distinction  cannot  be 
pressed  in  the  present  case.  It  can  hardly  be  sup- 
posed that  Paul,  if  we  concede  that  he  wrote  the 
Epistle  to  the  Colossians,  could  have  intended  to 
teach  anything  contrary  to  the  passage  in  Isaiah 
just  referred  to,  that  either  he  or  the  author  of 
the  Fourth  Gospel  purposed  to  contradict  by  the 
use  of  the  word  "through"  the  undoubted  teaching 
of  the  word  "  alone."  The  fact,  therefore,  must 
stand  that  what  is  elsewhere  mentioned  in  the  Bible 
as  an  exclusively  divine  act  is  said,  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament, to  have  been  performed,  in  some  real  and 
important  sense,  by  Christ.  I  feel  justified,  there- 
fore, in  retaining  the  act  of  creation  as  a  point 


THE  INCARNATION  245 

of  comparison,  although  it  could  be  omitted  alto- 
gether without  prejudice  to  my  argument. 

2.  Christ  is  the  preserver  of  the  world.  The 
closing  sentence  in  the  previous  quotation  would 
bear  out  this  statement,  but  the  last  clause  of  the 
following  passage  may  also  be  cited. 

"  God  .  .  .  hath  at  the  end  of  these  days 
spoken  unto  us  in  his  Son,  whom  he  appointed  heir 
of  all  things,  through  whom  also  he  made  the 
worlds ;  who  being  the  effulgence  of  his  glory,  and 
the  very  image  of  his  substance,  and  upholding  all 
things  hy  the  word  of  his  power,'^  etc.  (Hebrews 
i.  1-3.) 

3.  He  is  omnipotent.  So  much  would  be  in- 
ferred from  the  acts  of  power  already  ascribed  to 
him  in  the  creation  and  preservation  of  the  world. 
We  can  form  no  higher  idea  of  omnipotence  than 
is  suggested  by  the  ability  to  do  such  things. 
There  are  not  wanting  texts,  however,  in  which  the 
attribute  seems  to  be  expressly  ascribed  to  him. 

"  The  Lord  Jesus  Christ :  who  shall  fashion 
anew  the  body  of  our  humiliation,  that  it  may  be 
conformed  to  the  body  of  his  glory,  according  to 
the  working  whereby  he  is  able  even  to  subject  all 
things  unto  himself J^     (Philippians  iii.  20,  21.) 

4.  He  is  omnipresent.  So  much  is  implied  in 
the  fact  that  in  him  all  things  consist.  But  the 
following  text  is  also  in  harmony  with  it :  "  For 
where  two  or  three  are  gathered  together  in  my 
name,  there  am  I  in  the  midst  of  them."  (Mat- 
thew xviii.  20.) 


246    THE   RATIONAL  BASIS   OF   ORTHODOXY 

5.  He  is  immutable. 

"  But  of  the  Son  he  saith, 

.  .  .  Thou,  Lord,  in  the  heginning  hast  laid  the  foundation  of 

the  earth. 
And  the  heavens  are  the  works  of  thy  hands  : 
They  shall  perish  ;  but  thou  continuest : 
And  they  all  shall  wax  old  as  doth  a  garment ; 
And  as  a  mantle  shalt  thou  roll  them  up, 
As  a  garment,  and  they  shall  be  changed  : 
But  thou  art  the  same, 
And  thy  years  shall  not  fail." 

(Hebrews  i.  8,  10-12.) 

"  Jesus  Christ  is  the  same  yesterday  and  to-day, 
yea  and  for  ever."      (Hebrews  xiii.  8.) 

6.  He  is  eternal.  So  we  should  infer  from  the 
general  tenor  of  the  first  of  the  two  preceding 
quotations ;  but  the  same  fact  is  found  elsewhere. 

"  And  he  laid  his  right  hand  upon  me,  saying. 
Fear  not;  I  am  the  first  and  the  last,  and  the 
Living  one;  and  I  was  dead,  and  behold,  I  am 
alive  for  evermore."     (Revelation  i.  17, 18.) 

7.  He  is  an  infallible  judge  of  human  thoughts 
and  motives.  "These  things  saith  the  Son  of 
God,  .  .  .  And  all  the  churches  shall  know  that  I 
am  he  which  searcheth  the  reins  and  hearts :  and 
I  will  give  unto  each  one  of  you  according  to  your 
works."     (Revelation  ii.  18,  23.) 

This  text  is  all  the  more  noteworthy  because  it 
seems  expressly  designed  to  identify,  by  the  words 
"  I  am  he,"  the  son  of  God  who  uttered  it  with 
Jehovah  into  whose  mouth  the  same  words  had 
been  previously  put  by  Jeremiah.  (See  citation 
above.) 


THE  INCARNATION  247 

8.  He  is  an  object  of  adoration.  "Wherefore 
also  God  liigKly  exalted  him,  and  gave  unto  him 
the  name  which  is  above  every  name ;  that  in  the 
name  of  Jesus  every  knee  should  bow,  of  tilings 
in  heaven  and  things  on  earth  and  things  under 
the  earth,  and  that  every  tongue  should  confess 
that  Jesus  Christ  is  Lord,  to  the  glory  of  God  the 
Father."      (Philippians  ii.  9-11.) 

"And  every  created  thing  which  is  in  the  heaven, 
and  on  the  earth,  and  uuder  the  earth,  and  on  the 
sea,  and  all  things  that  are  in  them,  heard  I  say- 
ing. Unto  him  that  sitteth  on  the  throne,  and  unto 
the  Lamh^  be  the  blessing,  and  the  honor,  and 
the  glory,  and  the  dominion,  for  ever  and  ever." 
(Revelation  v.  13.) 

These  ascriptions  of  a  joint  worship  to  the 
Father  and  the  Son  have  a  pecuhar  significance 
when  taken  in  connection  with  the  citation  from 
the  words  of  Christ  himself  which  is  given  above : 
"  Thou  shalt  worship  the  Lord  thy  God,  and  him 

only    shalt    thou    serve  "  (kqI  avr^  /xovw  Xarpeuo-et?). 

(Matthew  iv.  10.) 

This  method  of  condensing  the  teachings  of  the 
Bible  on  this  subject  may  be  compared  to  that 
pursued  in  building  an  arch.  Both  columns  are 
made  up  of  stones  corresponding  in  size  and  num- 
ber, and  gradually  approach  each  other  until  all 
that  is  needed  for  the  completion  of  the  struc- 
ture is  the  insertion  of  a  single  stone  which  will 
join  the  two  columns  together.  The  successive 
stones  in  the  above  argument  are  creation,  pre- 


248    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

servation,  omnipotence,  etc.  God  created  the 
world,  Christ  created  the  world,  God  preserves 
it,  Christ  preserves  it,  God  is  omnipotent,  Christ 
is  omnipotent,  and  so  on.  All  that  is  now  lack- 
ing is  some  text  or  texts  which  will  assure  us 
that  these  writers  were  perfectly  aware  of  what 
they  were  teaching,  that  we  are  not  deducing  from 
their  utterances  a  conclusion  which  they  would 
have  repudiated,  but  that  they  clearly  understood 
the  logical  drift  of  their  momentous  statements. 
A  distinct  recognition  on  their  part  of  the  essen- 
tial oneness  of  the  Father  and  the  Son  would  serve 
to  remove  all  suspicion  of  accident  or  carelessness 
from  the  results  to  which  they  have  led  the  great 
mass  of  their  readers  for  eighteen  centuries.  And 
this  need  is  abundantly  met.  The  first  verse  in  the 
Fourth  Gospel,  "  In  the  beginning  was  the  Word, 
and  the  Word  was  with  God,  and  the  Word  was 
God ; "  the  sixth  verse  in  the  second  chapter  of 
Philippians,  "  Who,  being  in  the  form  of  God, 
counted  it  not  a  prize  to  be  on  an  equality  with 
God ; "  the  eighth  verse  in  the  first  chapter  of 
Hebrews,  already  cited  for  another  purpose,  "  But 
of  the  Son  he  saith,  Thy  throne,  O  God,  is  for 
ever  and  ever,"  are  texts  which  fulfill  the  various 
conditions  just  named.  So,  too,  the  most  natural 
rendering  of  Revelation  xxii.  10-16  identifies 
Christ  under  the  name  of  Jesus  with  him  who  is 
the  Alpha  and  the  Omega,  the  first  and  the  last, 
the  beginning  and  the  end.  That  at  least  the 
first  three  of  these  passages  teach  the  substantial 


THE   INCARNATION  249 

identity  of  God  and  Christ  would  never  have  been 
questioned  save  in  the  interests  of  a  preconceived 
theory;  and  although  Lightfoot  and  AKord  can 
be  quoted  against  that  interpretation  of  the  fourth 
which  I  have  adopted,  I  am  convinced  that  most 
candid  persons  will  feel  that  the  views  of  these 
justly  celebrated  scholars  are  opposed  to  the  obvi- 
ous teaching  of  the  passage.  These  direct  identi- 
fications of  Christ  with  God,  or  any  one  of  them, 
in  fact,  will  serve  for  the  keystone  of  the  arch ;  so 
that  what  began  as  two  ends  as  one.  They  help 
to  support  the  two  columns  of  evidence  already 
described,  and  at  the  same  time  are  held  in  place 
by  them.  All  of  the  texts  cited  and  many  others 
that  might  be  added  interpret  one  another.  They 
unite  to  form  a  coherent,  self-consistent  structure 
of  doctrinal  teaching,  which  establishes  the  propo- 
sition with  which  this  discussion  began,  and  shows 
that  Christ  was  regarded  as  God  incarnate  by 
some  of  the  leading  Christian  writers  to  whom  we 
owe  the  groundwork  of  our  religious  faith. 

It  is  not  enough  to  show  that  the  texts  quoted 
may  be  made,  by  dint  of  more  or  less  exegetical 
ingenuity,  to  yield  a  different  meaning  from  that 
which  is  most  obvious.  The  difficulty  to  be  over- 
come by  him  who  would  assail  them  lies  much 
deeper.  He  is  obliged  to  assume,  in  utter  disre- 
gard of  the  theory  of  probabilities,  that  several 
writers  who  undertook  to  reveal  the  essential  na- 
ture of  Christ  coincidently  blundered  so  as  to  give 
the  impression  that  he  was  God  incarnate  when  it 


250    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

was  not  their  purpose  to  convey  any  sucli  idea. 
If  we  could  admit  that  a  single  author,  as,  for 
example,  the  writer  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews, 
was  infehcitous  in  expressing  himself  on  this  sub- 
ject, it  would  be  a  strange  coincidence  if  the  author 
of  the  Fourth  Gospel  made  precisely  the  same  mis- 
take. And  even  if  we  could  adjust  our  minds  to 
such  an  improbability,  our  credulity  would  be  over- 
taxed if  we  were  asked  to  believe  that  the  author 
of  Philippians  committed  exactly  the  same  blunder. 
Moreover,  those  who  deny  that  Philij)pians  and 
Colossians  were  from  the  same  pen  must  main- 
tain that  the  author  of  the  latter  furnishes  another 
instance  of  the  same  error  ;  while  those  who  con- 
tend that  the  Apocalypse  and  the  Fourth  Gospel 
were  composed  by  different  persons  have  added 
the  author  of  the  former  to  the  list  as  a  fifth. 
That  five,  or  four,  or  even  three  independent  au- 
thors who  were  writing  for  common  people,  or  that 
three  writers  in  five  different  books,  should  have 
accidentally  used  language  so  awkwardly  as  to 
necessitate  the  conclusion  in  most  minds  that  they 
believed  that  Christ  was  God  is  improbable  to  the 
verge  of  absurdity.  The  truth  of  their  statements 
may  of  course  be  legitimately  questioned,  but  to 
hold  that  they  unintentionally  united  in  teaching  a 
most  startling  doctrine  which  none  of  them  believed 
transcends  the  powers  of  logical  thought. 

I  am  well  aware  that  there  are  many  upon  whom 
the  fact  which  I  have  thus  endeavored  to  establish 
will  make  no  impression,  that  the  time  has  gone  by 


THE  INCARNATION  251 

when  a  discussion  of  this  question  can  be  settled 
by  an  appeal  to  proof-texts.  It  has  been  my  pur- 
pose in  the  foregoing  argument  only  to  determine 
and  set  forth  just  what  views  were  held  regarding 
the  person  of  Christ  by  those  writers  who  lived  in 
his  time  and  who  reflect,  consequently,  the  impres- 
sion made  by  his  life  and  teachings  upon  his  own 
age.  And  it  would  seem  to  be  an  undeniable  fact 
that  the  people  to  whom  is  attributed  the  clearest 
theological  insight  that  any  section  of  the  human 
race  has  ever  attained,  who,  as  Professor  Huxley 
expresses  it,  "  created  the  first  consistent,  remorse- 
less, naked  monotheism  which,  so  far  as  history  re- 
cords, appeared  in  the  world,"  who  knew  no  greater 
sin  than  the  worship  of  the  creature  as  the  Creator, 
gave  birth,  nevertheless,  in  the  crowning  period 
of  its  unique  inspiration  to  a  book  which,  while 
embodying  the  highest  phases  of  that  inspiration, 
ascribed  over  and  over  again  such  qualities,  acts, 
and  attributes  to  a  man  as  make  it  impossible  for 
most  fair-minded  persons  to  distinguish  him,  in  any 
important  particular,  from  the  Supreme  Being. 

And,  moreover,  it  is  the  whole  book  that  is 
responsible  for  this  result.  The  doctrine  of  the 
incarnation  does  not  rest  on  a  certain  number  of 
passages  culled  from  the  writings  of  tliree  or  four 
of  the  sacred  authors.  Of  the  twenty-seven  docu- 
ments which  compose  the  New  Testament  and  the 
nine  or  more  authors  who  contributed  them,  there 
is  scarcely  one  that  does  not  furnish  something  to 
substantiate  the  doctrine  we  are  considering.     Not 


252    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

one  of  them  gives  it  in  its  entirety.  Not  one  of 
them  but  leaves  some  gaps  in  the  story  of  the 
incarnation.  Some  affirm  the  original  divinity 
of  Clnnst  and  that  he  took  on  hunself  the  nature 
of  man.  Others  supply  a  link  that  is  missing  in 
these  accounts  by  relating  the  incident  of  the 
miraculous  birth.  Some  who  make  no  statements 
as  to  the  essential  sublimity  of  Christ's  nature,  and 
are  supposed  by  some  on  that  account  to  be  igno- 
rant of  the  views  regarding  it  which  were  held  by 
others,  record,  nevertheless,  works  wi^ought  by  him 
which  are  in  harmony  with  those  views,  teachings 
uttered  by  him  which  deserve  to  be  called  divine, 
and  a  life  lived  by  him  which  may  well  be  deemed 
godlike.  And  still  another,  hardly  more  than 
glancing  at  the  earthly  career  and  experiences 
of  Jesus,  describes  his  glory  after  death  in  such 
language  that  Baur,  w^hom  no  one  will  suspect  of 
prejudice  in  the  premises,  declares  that  the  honors 
paid  to  Christ  in  the  Apocalypse  leave  no  room 
for  any  important  distinction  between  him  and  the 
Deity. 

And  this  remarkable  harmony  and  dovetailing 
of  so  many  documents,  written  for  different  pur- 
poses and  from  diverse  points  of  view,  was  not  the 
result  of  collusion.  It  is  now  known  that  they 
were  all,  with  possibly  an  unimportant  exception 
or  two,  practically  contemporaneous.  All,  or  about 
all  of  them,  appeared  during  a  period  of  hardly 
more  than  forty  years.  'They  were  at  the  outset, 
in  many  instances,  the  property  of  only  sections  of 


THE  INCARNATION  253 

the  Christian  Church,  and  time  was  required  for 
them  to  become  generally  known.  There  is  no  rear 
son  to  suppose  that  the  different  authors  were  as  a 
rule  acquainted  with  one  another's  writings.  Yet 
when  their  various  contributions  were  brought  to- 
gether in  the  canon,  they  were  found  to  fit  into  one 
another  in  such  a  way  as  to  create  a  conception 
of  Jesus  Christ  as  God  incarnate  which  is  at  once 
adequate,  seK-consistent,  and  grand. 

It  would  not  be  strange  if  we  were  reminded  of 
a  large  load  of  boxes  which  was  once  landed  on  an 
island  near  New  York  city.  Each  of  them  con- 
tained a  metallic  casting,  evidently  fragmentary 
and  of  a  shape  which  would  be  unintelligible  to 
most  people  ;  but  when  all  were  put  together  they 
formed  the  statue  of  Liberty  which  is  now  stand- 
ing there.  So,  out  of  the  New  Testament  as  a 
whole,  out  of  a  union  of  various  independent  docu- 
ments dating  back  to  the  time  of  the  first  disciples, 
out  of  the  bright,  consummate  flower  of  Hebrew 
inspiration,  there  has  arisen  a  supernatural  figure, 
self -consistent  in  words  and  works,  in  character 
and  alleged  origin,  which  the  Christian  Church  have 
been  constrained  to  regard  as  the  god-man  and  the 
incarnate  Deity. 

Now  we  have  here  a  psychological  phenomenon 
which  demands  an  explanation  and  compels  us  to 
ask  the  questions :  Were  these  men  in  the  right  ? 
Is  it  irrational  to  accept  their  view?  Without  at 
present  admitting  that  their  declarations  are  of 
themselves  competent  to  prove  so  startling  a  doc- 


254    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

trine,  is  it  consistent  with  a  riglit  use  of  the  rea- 
soning faculties  to  regard  it  as  at  least  possibly 
true  ?  Is  it  entitled  to  so  much  respect  as  a  dic- 
tum of  religious  philosophy  that  it  may  be  held  by 
a  thoughtful  man  without  subjecting  him  to  the 
charge  of  superstition  or  credulity  ? 

Some  years  ago  a  clergyman  in  one  of  our  most 
cultured  cities,  commenting  on  a  powerful  lecture 
which  had  recently  been  given  on  this  same  sub- 
ject, expressed  his  amazement  that  the  lecturer 
should  have  had  the  impiety  to  put  on  a  level  with 
the  Creator  a  man  who  had  lived  for  only  thirty 
years  in  far-off  Palestine.  Now,  waiving  all  crit- 
icism of  any  inexactness  there  may  be  in  his  report 
of  what  the  lecturer  actually  said,  and  without 
dwelling  on  the  fact  that  this  man  appeared  at 
the  centre  and  source  of  the  most  potent  religious 
influence  of  his  time,  and  that  the  providential 
choice  of  locality  has  been  justified  by  subsequent 
results,  the  question  may  properly  be  asked.  Is 
there  necessarily  any  impiety  in  believing  that 
God  might,  under  any  circumstances  whatever, 
become  a  man  ?  Is  there  necessarily  anything  so 
low  and  debasing  in  a  life  lived  in  the  flesh  that 
we  must  deem  it  inconsistent  with  an  adequate 
conception  of  the  great  Creator  to  suppose  that  he 
could  for  any  conceivable  reason  be  moved  to  live 
such  a  life  ?  Is  the  condition  of  humanity  inevi- 
tably so  low  in  every  respect  that  no  considera- 
tions can  be  imagined  which  would  induce  him 
who  placed  man  in  it  to  enter  it  himself  ? 


THE  INCARNATION  255 

To  answer  these  questions  affirmatively  is  to 
betray  a  false  idea  of  true  dignity,  an  inadequate 
appreciation  of  the  essentials  of  divine  majesty. 
The  monarch  who  forsakes  his  throne  and  mingles 
in  disguise  with  his  subjects  in  order  that  he  may 
become  a  wiser  king  resmnes  his  sceptre  with  no 
stain  on  his  royalty,  but  with  a  new  gloss  on  his  man- 
hood. The  philanthropist  who  leaves  behind  him 
the  comforts  and  refinements  to  which  he  has  been 
used,  who  lives  with  the  ignorant  and  the  unclean, 
with  vagabonds  and  criminals  of  every  description, 
winning  his  bread  as  they  win  it  when  they  come 
by  it  honestly,  spending  his  nights  as  they  do  in 
station-houses  or  on  the  pavement,  who  endures 
the  abuse,  the  insults,  the  privations  incident  to 
this  mode  of  living,  and  aU  merely  that  he  may  be 
better  able  to  understand  and  eventually  to  miti- 
gate the  lot  of  those  who  move  and  have  their 
being  in  the  lowest  social  stratum,  has  certainly 
not  degraded  hunself  in  our  estimation  by  so  doing, 
but  has  shed  a  new  lustre  on  human  nature. 

Now,  if  it  was  necessary,  in  order  that  God 
might  reveal  his  self-sacrificing  nature  and  so  win 
an  enthusiastic  devotion  from  his  creatures  which 
would  develop  in  them  a  character  that  could 
not  otherwise  be  produced,  if  in  order  to  do  this 
it  was  necessary  that  he  should  perform  a  stu- 
pendous act  of  self-sacrifice,  is  it  derogatory  to  a 
proper  conception  of  divine  dignity  to  believe  that 
he  would  do  so  ?  If,  in  order  to  enable  them  to 
view  him  as   a   friend,   a  faithful   companion,  a 


256    THE  KATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

sjnupathizing  confidant,  an  ever-present  help  in 
time  of  trouble,  and  to  cultivate  in  them  moral 
qu  ah  ties  and  conduct  appropriate  to  such  a  con- 
ception of  him,  it  was  indispensable  that  he  should 
afford  them  such  an  object-lesson,  such  a  definite 
illustration  of  his  true  nature  as  only  an  incarna- 
tion would  furnish,  is  there  any  impiety  in  affirm- 
ing that  he  would,  under  such  circumstances,  take 
on  himseK  the  form  and  nature  of  a  man  ?  Admit- 
ting that  such  an  act  on  his  part  would  be  a  mira- 
cle of  vast  proportions,  would  that  fact  constitute 
an  insuperable  objection  to  believing  that  such  an 
act  had  been  performed,  if,  as  has  been  previously 
urged,  there  can  be  nothing  irrational  in  holding 
that  God  would  transcend  the  sphere  of  familiar 
natural  law  in  order  to  obtain  a  desirable  result 
which  could  not  otherwise  be  achieved?  If  the 
belief  in  an  incarnation  has  been  beneficial  to  the 
human  race,  if  mankind  would  not  have  reached 
its  present  s^Diritual  level  without  it,  if  it  could  not 
have  been  omitted  from  the  creeds  of  Christendom 
during  the  last  eighteen  centuries,  nor  from  those 
of  most  churches  at  the  present  time,  without 
deadening  missionary  effort  and  weakening  the 
motives  to  self-denial,  certainly  there  can  be  no- 
thing impious  or  absurd  in  the  supj)osition  that  to 
create  such  a  belief  God  would,  if  it  was  neces- 
sary, become  a  man ;  for  love  makes  all  sacrifices 
possible,  and  we  have  learned  to  regard  God  as 
the  personification  of  love. 

If,  then,  there  is  nothing  intrinsically  unreason- 


THE  INCARNATION  257 

able  in  the  belief  tliat  God  might,  to  gain  other- 
wise unattainable  ends,  become  a  man,  is  there 
anything  irrational  in  the  doctrine  that  he  did  be- 
come the  man  Jesus  ?  If  he  should  become  a  man, 
is  it  conceivable  that  he  would  be  a  better  one  ? 
In  order  to  become  morally  like  God,  would  any 
man  have  to  add  to  his  own  character  any  virtues 
or  any  degree  of  virtue  which  Jesus  lacked  ?  Could 
incarnate  Deity  be  more  truthfully  represented 
than  by  perfect  manhood  ?  On  the  contrary,  is  it 
not  true  that  the  life  of  Jesus  has  exalted  our  idea 
of  the  ethical  qualities  of  the  Almighty,  and  that 
the  God  whom  Christians  worship,  no  matter  what 
may  be  their  theory  of  the  person  of  Christ,  is  sim- 
ply Jesus  of  Nazareth  abstracted  from  the  neces- 
sary limitations  of  a  finite  human  life  ?  As  Mill  i 
says  :  "  It  is  Christ  rather  than  God  whom  Chris- 
tianity has  held  up  to  believers  as  the  pattern  of 
perfection  for  humanity.  It  is  the  God  incarnate 
more  than  the  God  of  the  Jews  who  beinff  ideal- 
ized  has  taken  so  great  and  salutary  a  hold  on  the 
human  mind."  To  say  that  if  God  should  assume 
human  nature  he  would  be  a  better  man  than 
Jesus  would  be  virtually  to  say  that  he  woidd  be 
better  than  we  now  deem  him  to  be,  since  the  moral 
character  we  refer  to  him  is  simply  that  of  Christ. 
If,  then,  it  is  supposable  that  to  accomphsh  a  work 
of  divine  love  God  might  become  a  himian  being, 
there  could  certainly  be  no  absurdity  in  suj^posing 
that  for  such  an  end  he  did  become  the  man  whose 
^  Three  Essays  on  Eeligion,  pp.  253,  254. 


258    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

character  we  are  necessarily  honoring  when  we 
praise  God.  Nor  can  there  be  any  more  impiety  in 
maintaining  that  Christ  was  God  than  in  holding 
that  God  is  Christ,  in  seeing  the  Deity  in  our 
only  perfect  man  than  in  beholding  in  the  Deity 
merely  our  highest  standard  of  perfect  manhood. 

That  the  doctrine  of  the  incarnation  should  give 
rise  to  some  unanswerable  questions  was  to  be  ex- 
pected. The  fields  of  philosophic  research  which 
lie  beyond  the  scope  of  the  finite  reason  are  fertile 
in  paradoxes.  The  contradictions  in  which  every 
one  involves  himself  who  ventures  to  speculate  on 
the  nature  of  the  Absolute  are  not  to  be  wholly 
avoided  by  those  who  would  explain  the  transition 
of  the  Absolute  into  the  Conditioned.  Indeed,  it 
may  well  be  questioned  whether  orthodoxy  has  not 
attempted  too  much  in  this  direction.  No  doubt 
the  temptation  was  great.  The  problem  suggested 
has  fascinated  some  of  the  profoundest  minds  the 
world  has  known.  There  are  texts  in  the  Scrip- 
tures —  some  of  which  have  been  already  quoted  — 
which  leave  no  escape  from  dualism  or  tritheism 
unless  there  is  such  a  diversity  in  the  divine  unity 
that  the  Godhead  can  be  referred  to  collectively 
as  well  as  in  the  singular  nmnber.  It  was  the 
philosophical  and  exegetical  difficulties  of  the  situ- 
ation that  gave  birth  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Trin- 
ity. But  as  this  is  sometimes  stated,  it  may  be 
plausibly  stigmatized  as  an  attempt  to  explain  the 
inexplicable  and  to  define  the  indefinable.  It  may 
well  be  doubted  whether  the  doctrine,  in  this  form, 


THE  INCARNATION  259 

does  not  weaken  rather  than  strengthen,  at  the 
present  time,  the  creeds  of  orthodoxy.  It  may- 
be freely  conceded  that  the  question  how  a  mono- 
theist  can  consistently  recognize  the  existence  of 
three  more  or  less  independent  activities  in  the 
divine  nature  cannot  be  ignored ;  but  to  answer  it 
by  affirming  that  the  Godhead  comprises  three 
persons  who  are  yet  not  persons  in  the  ordinary 
sense  of  the  word,  or  in  any  sense  that  can  be 
made  intelligible,  is  really  to  give  no  answer  at  all. 
It  is  practically  to  evade  the  question  by  pushing 
the  difficulty  one  step  farther  back. 

It  is  said  by  some  military  critics  that  the  chief 
reverses  which  befell  the  Union  army  on  the  sec- 
ond day  at  Gettysburg  were  due  to  the  fact  that 
one  of  the  corps  occupied  a  position  in  advance 
of  the  chosen  and  natural  line  of  defense.  It  is 
maintained  by  the  same  authorities  that  the  suc- 
cesses of  the  last  day  residted  from  a  change  in 
the  alignment  which  placed  the  whole  army  where 
strategically  it  belonged.  Orthodoxy  cannot  do 
without  a  Trinity,  which,  as  already  explained,  is 
a  philosophical  and  an  exegetical  necessity,  and 
forms  the  capstone  of  its  theology.  What  it  can 
do  without  is  attempts  to  defend  untenable  propo- 
sitions, to  vindicate  dubious  theories  which  are  far 
in  advance  of  the  logical  requirements  of  the  situ- 
ation. All  that  can  be  known  and  all  that  need 
be  claimed  in  reference  to  the  deepest  aspects  of 
the  doctrine  in  question  may  be  summed  up  in 
some  such  definition  as  this :    The  foundation  of 


260    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

the  Trinity  is  an  incomprehensible  fact  in  the  di- 
vine nature  which  is  aptly  expressed  by  the  figure 
Thi^ee.  Nothing  more  than  this  need  be  asserted 
in  order  to  meet  the  exigencies  of  the  case,  and 
nothing  more  really  is  asserted  even  in  the  most 
elaborate  definitions  of  the  Trinity  when  these  are 
stated  in  terms  that  are  comprehensible. 

We  may  now  review  some  of  the  grounds  on 
which  we  are  justified  in  regarding  the  incarnation 
as  a  doctrine  which  is  at  least  entitled  to  philoso- 
phical respect. 

The  Darwinian  theory  implies  that  the  human 
race  is  being  gradually  shaped  into  moral  likeness 
to  an  invisible  Being  whose  crowning  attribute  is 
unselfish  love,  and  the  lifelong  experience  of  every 
man  who  is  willing  to  subject  this  belief  to  the  test 
of  appropriate  personal  conduct  will  furnish  him 
with  a  satisfactory  proof  of  its  soundness.  But 
observation  of  the  motives  by  which  the  human 
will  is  influenced  and  the  moral  character  of  men 
is  improved  convinces  us  that  an  exhibition  of  self- 
sacrifice  and  paternal  love  on  the  part  of  God  is 
necessary  for  the  development  of  the  highest  type 
of  righteousness  in  mankind,  and  that  such  an  exhi- 
bition can  be  given  only  by  his  taking  upon  him- 
self, in  some  real  sense,  the  nature  of  man.  That 
such  an  act  would  be  miraculous  affords  no  fatal 
presumption  against  its  having  been  performed, 
because  a  miracle,  according  to  the  admissions  of 
candid  writers,  may  be  established  by  evidence  in 
case  a  need  has  arisen  which  would  justify  a  spe- 


THE  INCARNATION  261 

cial  work  of  God,  —  a  condition  which  would  seem 
to  have  been  fulfilled  by  such  a  case  of  imperative 
necessity  as  that  which  has  just  been  described,  — 
and  because  the  miraculous  element  in  the  life  of 
Christ  has  already  been  attested  by  evidence  of 
extraordinary  strength.  A  race  of  people  which 
is  widely  conceded  to  have  been  gifted  with  a 
deeper  theological  discernment  than  has  been  pos- 
sessed by  any  other  that  has  appeared  on  the  earth, 
whose  religious  inspiration  is  assigned  by  the  most 
cultivated  nations  to  the  highest  place,  and  who 
had  been  impregnably  fortified  against  idolatrous 
tendencies  by  an  age-long  process  of  natural  selec- 
tion, closed  its  prophetic  career  by  producing  a  set 
of  writings  whose  moral  and  religious  teaching 
transcends  that  of  all  previous  and  all  subsequent 
books,  and  which  unite  in  creating  an  irresistible 
impression  that  these  writers  believed  that  God 
became  incarnate  in  Jesus  Christ.  The  character 
which  they  ascribe  to  him  is  divine,  as  is  proved 
by  the  fact  that  it  has  been  transferred  to  God,  and 
is  what  men  worship  either  consciously  or  imcon- 
sciously  when  they  worship  him  ;  while  the  inci- 
dents which  attended  the  life  and  death  of  this 
man,  as  related  by  biographers  whose  fidelity  in 
recording  his  words  shows  them  to  be  competent 
and  conscientious  historians,  do  but  strengthen  the 
inevitable  implications  of  the  New  Testament  re- 
garding his  nature.  This  view  of  the  person  of 
Christ  is  so  clearly  taught  by  the  fundamental 
documents  of  Christianity  that  it  has  been  held 


262    THE   RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

by  an  overwlielroing  majority  of  the  church  for 
more  than  eighteen  centuries,  and  with  such  benefi- 
cent results  that  we  are  reduced  to  the  alternative 
of  either  believing  that  an  incarnation  has  taken 
place,  or  of  persuading  ourselves  that  a  false  doc- 
trine has  been  the  providential  means  of  convey- 
ing to  the  human  race  its  highest  conception  of 
the  divine  character  and  the  most  powerful  ethical 
stimulus  it  has  ever  known. 

These  considerations  would  certainly  seem  to 
justify  us  in  including  this  doctrine  among  those 
articles  of  faith  which,  as  explained  in  the  first 
chapter,  every  man  is  warranted  in  holding  with 
the  hope  of  having  them  verified  by  a  later  experi- 
ence of  their  influence  on  his  own  life  and  on  the 
religious  development  of  his  fellow  men.  If  men 
are  justified  in  adopting  any  religion  whatever  that 
is  worthy  of  the  name,  we  may  be  confident  that 
the  logical  supports  of  the  Incarnation  remove 
it  beyond  the  range  of  any  sneer  leveled  at  an 
antiquated  theology  or  human  superstition. 


CHAPTER  X 

THE    ATONEMENT 

No  doctrine  o£  Christian  theology  has  under- 
gone more  mutations  or  developed  wider  differ- 
ences of  opinion  than  the  one  now  to  be  con- 
sidered. No  definition  of  the  Atonement  is  given 
in  the  New  Testament,  which,  indeed,  as  a  rule, 
contains  only  the  raw  material  out  of  which  philo- 
sophical statements  of  belief  have  been  wrought ; 
and  the  attempts  wliich  have  been  made  to  ex- 
plain rationally  and  satisfactorily  the  relation  of 
Christ's  life,  sufferings,  death,  and  resurrection 
to  human  needs  are  so  diverse  that  they  afford 
abundant  proof  of  the  difficulty  that  inheres  in  the 
subject. 

Among  the  many  expressions  used  by  the  sacred 
writers  to  describe  the  effect  of  Christ's  work  on 
human  destiny,  the  word  "  ransom  "  is  prominent. 
It  was  borrowed  from  the  experiences  of  contem- 
porary life,  at  a  time  when  it  must  have  been  com- 
mon to  procure  the  freedom  of  slaves  or  of  military 
captives  by  the  payment  of  money.  It  is  by  no 
means  strange,  therefore,  that  an  analogy  should 
have  been  assumed  to  exist  between  such  a  pro- 
ceeding and  the   sacrifice   of    Christ.     It    is   not 


264    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

surprising  that  the  human  mind  in  its  gropings 
after  the  deeper  reasons  of  his  death  should  have 
surmised  that  it  was  a  price  paid  to  Satan  for  the 
abandonment  of  his  claims  upon  humanity.  Ac- 
cording to  this  theory  sin  renders  a  man  a  slave 
to  a  powerful  evil  personality,  a  view  to  which  the 
helplessness  which  men  so  often  feel  when  pitting 
their  enfeebled  wills  against  an  evil  habit  would, 
in  an  age  of  crude  thought,  easily  adapt  itself, 
and  which  would  be  sure  to  find  confirmation  in 
Christ's  allusions  to  "  the  Prince  of  this  world," 
and  in  various  scriptural  references  to  the  power 
of  Satan  and  the  bondage  of  sin. 

Another  view  of  the  Atonement  seems  to  have 
been  suggested  by  the  conception  of  sin,  in  the 
Lord's  prayer,  as  a  debt,  and  of  men,  in  the  para- 
ble, as  insolvent  debtors.  Such  a  conception  would 
commend  itself  to  many  minds.  The  notorious 
inflexibility  of  creditors,  the  utter  helplessness  of 
the  debtor  class  as  a  whole,  the  manifest  impossi- 
bility of  ever  paying  what  imprisonment  must  keep 
one  from  ever  earning,  are  facts  which  would  nat- 
urally fit  into  the  experiences  of  many  a  man  who 
had  become  the  victim  of  remorse,  whose  sins  had 
been  magnified  and  emphasized  by  an  upbraiding 
conscience.  To  become  a  prey  to  the  conviction 
that  every  evil  act  represents  a  failure  to  ren- 
der to  the  Ahnighty  an  obedience  to  which  he  is 
entitled,  and  is  consequently  of  the  nature  of  a 
debt  due  to  him  which  the  transgressor  can  never 
discharge,  and  which  the  divine  Creditor  cannot 


THE  ATONEMENT  265 

properly  remit,  was  to  be  prepared  to  adopt  a  view 
of  the  Atonement  in  harmony  with  that  idea.  The 
only  solution  of  his  own  difficulty  which  could 
occur  to  an  imprisoned  debtor  would  be  found  in 
his  constant  wish  that  somebody  else  would  pay 
his  debt.  For  such  an  event  he  would  yearn  by 
day,  and  he  would  dream  of  it  by  night.  That 
the  sufferings  of  Jesus  were  great  enough  to  liqui- 
date the  otherwise  hopeless  moral  indebtedness  of 
the  human  race  would  seem  to  one  who  held  the 
view  of  sin  just  suggested  a  plausible  theory ;  and, 
in  an  age  which  was  neither  critical  nor  profound, 
it  was  likely  to  win  a  wide  acceptance. 

What  is  known  as  "  the  governmental  theory  " 
has  had  able  and  distinguished  advocates.  It  re- 
gards the  death  of  Christ  as  satisfying  the  divine 
law  against  sin,  not  because  it  was  the  actual  pen- 
alty which  the  law  exacted,  but  because  the  suf- 
ferings involved  in  it  were  so  great  that  the  law 
would  not  be  dishonored  although  the  full  pun- 
ishment threatened  by  it  should  not  be  inflicted. 
The  principle  on  which  it  is  supposed  to  operate 
has  been  illustrated  by  the  case  of  a  military  com- 
mander who,  to  put  an  end  to  single  combats 
between  his  soldiers  and  those  of  the  hostile  army, 
made  a  law  that  any  man  who  shoidd  accept  a 
challenge  to  a  duel  of  that  kind  should  be  de- 
prived of  his  eyesight.  His  own  son  disobeyed 
the  law  and  killed  his  antagonist.  The  father,  to 
preserve  respect  for  his  law  and,  at  the  same  time, 
to    indidge   his  parental   instincts,   resorted   to   a 


266    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF   ORTHODOXY 

compromise.  He  destroyed  one  of  his  own  eyes 
and  one  eye  of  liis  son.  It  is  maintained  that  by 
this  device  as  much  was  effected  as  would  have 
resulted  from  a  strict  execution  of  the  law;  that, 
in  view  of  the  great  sacrifice  he  had  himself  made, 
no  one  would  be  likely  to  suspect  afterwards  either 
that  he  was  devoid  of  love  for  his  children  or  that 
his  laws  could  be  broken  with  impunity.  So, 
although  the  penalty  of  eternal  death,  which  was 
believed  to  have  been  incurred  by  all  mankind 
because  that  all  had  sinned,  was  not  inflicted  on 
the  followers  of  Christ,  yet  his  death  involved  so 
vast  a  sacrifice  on  the  part  of  the  supreme  Law- 
giver that  leniency  towards  them  would  bring  no 
discredit  on  the  divine  law.  Neither  the  veracity 
of  God  as  a  legislator  nor  his  paternal  love  for  his 
creatures  could  be  impeached,  it  is  said,  since  the 
one  had  been  vindicated  by  the  death  of  Christ  as 
effectually  as  it  would  have  been  had  the  law  been 
mercilessly  enforced,  while  the  other  had  received 
a  most  eloquent  and  touching  illustration. 

It  is  the  so-called  "  moral  theory,"  however,  that 
wins  most  favor  with  advanced  theological  thinkers 
at  the  present  time.  It  finds  the  efficacy  and  mean- 
ing of  Christ's  life  in  the  stimulus  which  his  exam- 
ple and  character  have  imparted  to  the  conscience 
and  moral  ambition  of  his  followers.  His  death  is 
the  dark  background  which  brings  out  into  clearer 
rehef  the  beauty  of  his  holiness,  but  it  is  devoid 
of  sacrificial  import.  The  Atonement,  as  thus  ex- 
plained, is  not  usually  conceived  as  vicarious ;  but 


THE  ATONEMENT  267 

as  it  necessarily  implies  that  without  the  self-sacri- 
fice and  heroic  righteousness  of  Jesus  the  human 
race  would  have  lacked  its  highest  moral  motive, 
there  would  seem  to  be  a  sense  in  which  that  adjec- 
tive might  properly  be  applied  to  the  theory.  If 
it  is  true  that  but  for  the  sufferings  and  death  of 
Christ  those  who  have  been  morally  quickened  by 
his  teachings  would  have  continued  in  their  sins 
until  they  had  reached  that  state  of  spiritual  insen- 
sibility which  may  be  called  the  death  of  the  soul, 
it  is  as  pertinent  to  affirm  that  he  died  in  their 
place  as  it  would  have  been  had  his  death  been 
substituted  for  theirs  in  any  other  sense  of  the 
word. 

Each  of  these  theories  and  others  that  miorht  be 
named  have  been  met  by  serious  objections.  The 
first  accords  to  evil  too  large  a  power,  and  elevates 
Satan  to  a  level  with  the  Ahriman  of  the  old  Per- 
sian dualism.  The  second  implies  that  our  obli- 
gations to  God  have  been  discharged  for  us  once 
for  all,  and  gives  color  to  the  suspicion  that  no- 
thing is  now  required  of  the  Christian  in  the  way 
of  obedience  to  divine  statutes. 

The  third,  while  professing  to  honor  the  veracity 
of  God,  actually  impugns  it.  He  does  not  keep 
his  word,  and  the  device  which  is  said  to  have 
enabled  him  to  break  it  without  loss  of  honor  can- 
not be  admitted  to  have  had  that  effect.  The 
military  commander  in  the  illustration  could  per- 
haps be  defended  for  tampering  with  his  own  law. 
It  might  be  urged  that  a  complication  had  arisen 


268    THE  RATIONAL   BASIS   OF   ORTHODOXY 

which  he  could  not  have  been  expected  to  foresee 
when  he  published  his  law.  But  it  cannot  be 
supposed  that  an  omniscient  Being  could  thus  be 
taken  by  surprise.  The  theory  under  considera- 
tion requires  us  to  believe  that  God  threatened  to 
punish  all  sinners  with  endless  death,  although  he 
purposed,  at  the  same  time,  not  to  punish  some 
of  them  in  that  way,  but  to  accept  in  their  case 
the  sacrifice  of  Christ  as  exempting  them  from  all 
judicial  retribution  whatever.  He  promidgates  a 
sweeping  ordinance  with  a  mental  reservation.  It 
would  be  hard  to  satisfy  most  minds  that  such  a 
proceeding  would  comport  with  the  moral  dignity 
of  the  Ruler  of  the  universe. 

A  serious  objection  to  the  theory  is  found  also 
in  the  fact  that  no  such  law  as  it  assumes  to  exist 
has  ever  been  generally  published.  The  theory  is 
meaningless  unless  it  can  be  shown  that  God  has 
definitely  pledged  himself  to  pronounce  sentence 
of  eternal  death  on  every  one  who  has  violated  his 
statutes  by  so  much  as  a  single  sin.  His  distribu- 
tive justice  and  his  veracity  would  not  otherwise 
be  involved.  It  would  be  necessary,  also,  if  the 
theory  is  to  be  worthy  of  its  name,  if  it  is  to 
avail  itself  of  the  analogy  of  human  governments, 
that  such  a  law  as  it  must  assume  should  be  uni- 
versally known.  The  common  maxim  that  igno- 
rance of  the  law  excuses  no  one  cannot  be  recog- 
nized as  applicable  here.  It  is  at  the  best  but  a 
confession  of  human  weakness,  an  exposure  of  the 
limited  discernment  of  earthly  judges.    It  declares 


THE   ATONEMENT  269 

only  a  necessary  policy  of  human  tribunals.  Ig- 
norance of  the  law  does  excuse  at  the  bar  of 
conscience  many  an  offence  which  the  courts 
must  punish.  It  can  hardly  be  supposed  that  the 
legislative  resources  of  the  Almighty  are  so  slight 
that  he  could  not  make  known  so  tremendous  an 
ordinance  to  every  moral  agent.  Even  if  it  should 
be  urged  that  the  eJews  might  have  found  after 
the  captivity  such  a  law  in  Ezekiel's  words,  "  The 
soul  that  sinneth,  it  shall  die,"  or  even  earlier  in 
the  threat  in  Genesis,  "In  the  day  that  thou 
eatest  thereof  thou  shalt  surely  die,"  it  is  evident 
that  the  Gentiles  did  not  have  that  opportunity. 
It  would  hardly  seem  consistent  with  any  worthy 
idea  of  divine  justice  to  hold  that  the  great  bulk 
of  the  human  race  had  been  condemned  to  hope- 
less death  for  breaking  a  statute  of  which  they  had 
never  heard.  They  could  not  be  said  to  have  had 
a  fair  chance,  if  they  had  been  kept  in  ignorance 
of  the  penalties  which  had  been  attached  to  diso- 
bedience. 

The  theory  can  be  very  much  improved  by  re- 
garding sin  as  a  violation  of  a  law  of  nature  rather 
than  an  infringement  of  an  express  divine  com- 
mandment. It  might  be  argued  that  the  first 
wrongful  act  disturbs  unfavorably  the  balance  of 
human  nature  and  begins  a  process  of  moral  dete- 
rioration which  will  continue  indefinitely.  Every 
act  that  is  done  is  repeated  more  and  more  easily. 
Every  sin,  therefore,  tends  to  perpetuate  itself  by 
increasing   the  propensity  to  sin.     As  recurrent 


270    THE   RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

acts  eventually  form  habits  which  in  time  become 
hopelessly  fixed,  a  single  sin  is  but  the  prelude  to 
an  unchangeable  evil  character.  As  James  traces 
out  the  process,  "  Each  man  is  tempted,  when  he 
is  drawn  away  by  his  own  lust,  and  enticed.  Then 
the  lust,  when  it  hath  conceived,  beareth  sin: 
and  the  sin,  when  it  is  fuUgrown,  bringeth  forth 
death."  The  man  is  the  victim  of  natural  law  as 
truly  as  he  would  have  been  had  he  begun  to  slide 
down  a  mountain  side  and  acquired  at  last  an  un- 
controllable momentum  which  ended  by  carrying 
him  over  a  precipice. 

Now,  to  counteract  this  increasing  downward 
tendency  in  those  who  have  sinned,  the  natural 
law  to  wliich  they  are  in  bondage  must  be  counter- 
acted by  the  introduction  of  a  new  moral  force. 
The  direction  of  the  soul's  development  must 
be  changed  from  evil  to  good.  The  man  must  be 
placed  in  such  a  relation  to  the  law  of  character 
that  it  will  make  him  better  and  better  instead  of 
worse  and  worse.  There  is  as  much  of  promise  in 
it  as  there  is  of  menace.  It  will  just  as  surely 
render  the  goodness  of  a  good  man  habitual  as  it 
will  confirm  the  badness  of  a  bad  man.  All  that 
is  needed  in  order  to  transform  it  into  a  beneficent 
influence  is  that  the  balance  of  the  human  will 
should  be  inclined  towards  righteousness. 

Regeneration  is  commonly  understood  in  the 
Christian  Church  to  involve  such  a  chanofe  in  the 
moral  bent  of  the  human  soul.  It  is  generally 
viewed  as  a  su]3ernatural  event,  as  a  new  impetus 


THE  ATONEMENT  271 

given  to  the  moral  nature  of  a  man  by  God  himself. 
It  is,  therefore,  somewhat  of  the  nature  of  a  mira- 
cle, the  manifestation  of  a  force  which  is  outside 
the  recognized  system  of  psychological  laws. 

But  such  an  interruption  of  the  regular  order 
of  nature,  such  a  reversal  of  the  natural  conse- 
quences of  sin,  might  produce  unfavorable  results. 
It  would  tend  to  cast  some  doubt  on  the  stability 
of  the  law  of  character.  It  introduces  an  element 
of  uncertainty  into  the  fundamental  postulate  on 
which  moral  science  must  rest.  Ground  has  been 
furnished  for  the  suspicion  that  other  laws  of 
nature  may  be  set  aside  by  a  divine  fiat.  A  step 
has  been  taken  in  the  direction  of  encouraging 
men  to  look  for  miracles  as  a  means  of  saving 
them  from  the  natural  consequences  of  their  own 
bad  deeds. 

To  avoid  this  danger  the  regeneration  of  man 
must  be  stamped  as  unique.  It  must  take  place 
under  such  circumstances  as  will  leave  no  doubt 
in  any  mind  that  it  is  an  exceptional  event.  An 
incarnation,  a  divine  sacrifice,  with  which  it  is 
inseparably  associated,  it  might  be  said,  would 
have  that  effect.  Such  an  event  would  illustrate 
most  vividly  the  attachment  of  God  to  the  estab- 
lished order  of  nature,  for  it  would  show  him  to  be 
unwilling  to  depart  from  it  without  subjecting  him- 
self to  unspeakable  suffering.  It  would  emphasize 
also  his  transcendent  love  for  mankind  through  the 
magnitude  of  the  sacrifice  he  would  be  willing  to 
undergo  in   man's  behalf.     There  is  no  question 


272    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

here  of  vindicating  the  divine  veracity,  for  he  has 
given  no  pledge  that  the  course  of  nature  shall 
remain  uniform.  Nor  is  his  honor  as  a  lawgiver 
imperiled,  for  he  has  condoned  no  violation  of  a 
public  statute.  The  only  divine  attributes  that 
are  in  conflict  —  to  borrow  the  old  phraseology  — 
are  his  love  for  men  and  the  wisdom  which  is  ex- 
pressed in  the  persistence  of  natural  law ;  and  the 
Atonement,  as  thus  conceived,  would  honor  both 
far  less  ambiguously  than  colliding  attributes  are 
honored  by  the  governmental  theory  in  its  present 
form.  And  it  is  possible  that  some  such  view  of 
the  Atonement  as  this  might  meet  the  needs  of 
any  who  are  constrained  to  believe  that  sin  cannot 
be  pardoned  even  on  repentance  without  the  agency 
of  a  divine  sacrifice. 

The  fourth  theory  fails  to  explain  satisfactorily 
Christ's  own  impUcations  as  to  the  meaning  of  his 
work  and  the  interpretation  of  it  given  by  contem- 
porary apostles  and  evangelists,  who  may  be  fairly 
supposed  to  have  had  at  least  some  knowledge  on 
this  point. 

Moreover,  a  perfect  moral  example  is  not  of 
itself  competent  to  reform  the  human  race.  The 
world  has  had  many  living  illustrations  of  a  high 
type  of  virtue  which  did  not  secure  a  general  imi- 
tation. Nor  is  it  historically  true  that  the  moral 
character  and  ethical  teachings  of  Jesus  have  been 
the  chief  influence  to  which  are  due  the  spread  of 
Christianity  and  the  consequent  elevation  of  man's 
moral   ideals.     It  is   even  now  charged    in  some 


THE   ATONEMENT  273 

quarters  against  almost  the  whole  o£  the  Chris- 
tian Church  that  it  sets  creeds  above  character 
and  faith  above  ris^hteousness.  In  the  sermons  of 
successful  evangelists  from  the  days  of  the  apostles 
to  the  present  time,  the  perfect  example  of  Jesus  is 
not  used  as  the  principal  motive  with  which  to  sway 
the  human  will.  The  Atonement  viewed  objec- 
tively is  the  influence  by  which  men  are  made  at 
one  with  God,  and  it  is  undeniable  that  whatever 
progress  has  been  achieved  in  that  direction  was 
not  initiated  by  and  is  not  primarily  due  to  the 
power  of  Christ's  moral  example  and  precepts. 

It  does  not  follow,  however,  that  we  must  select 
one  of  the  various  theories  that  have  been  pro- 
pounded and  defend  it  as  the  only  correct  one,  or 
that  we  must  discard  them  all  because  of  the  diffi- 
culties with  which  they  are  separately  incumbered. 
The  very  fact  that  they  have  been  held  and  that 
each  of  them  has,  perhaps,  many  adherents  in  the 
world  to-day,  might  suggest  that  there  is  a  prac- 
tical religious  truth  in  every  one  of  them.  We 
may  safely  infer  that  if  we  can  discover  in  them 
some  common  element,  some  adaptedness  to  the 
spiritual  needs  of  human  nature  in  which  they  aU 
share,  we  have  found  the  true  theory  of  the  Atone- 
ment, or  at  least  all  that  is  essential  to  it. 

It  is  a  very  common  belief  among  men,  especially 
among  those  whose  consciences  are  troubled  by  the 
memory  of  their  misdeeds,  that  repentance  does 
not  of  itself  afford  a  sufficient  ground  for  divine 
forgiveness.     A  conviction,  or  at  least  a  suspicion, 


274    THE   RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

is  quite  likely  to  be  cherished  that  their  sins  have 
erected  a  barrier  between  them  and  their  Maker 
which  cannot  be  removed  even  by  a  subsequent 
virtuous  life.  It  is  not  necessary  for  us  to  spend 
much  time  in  investigating  the  soundness  of  this 
very  prevalent  human  opinion,  in  inquiring  whether 
it  reflects  with  any  considerable  accuracy  the  real 
facts  of  the  case.  We  need  not  stop  to  ask 
whether  the  parable  of  the  Prodigal  Son  would 
require  to  be  supplemented  by  some  act  of  vicarious 
sacrifice  on  the  part  of  the  father,  or  by  some  pro- 
pitiatory rite  on  the  part  of  the  returning  profligate, 
before  it  coidd  be  safely  commended  to  a  penitent 
man  as  a  true  picture  of  the  way  of  salvation. 
It  cannot  be  doubted,  especially  by  those  who  are 
familiar  with  the  workings  of  human  minds  under 
the  influence  of  remorse,  that  a  very  serious  draw- 
back to  the  reformation  of  many  a  guilty  person  is 
created  by  the  fear  which  he  feels  that  his  wrong- 
doing has  interposed  an  obstacle  in  the  way  of  his 
salvation  which  no  righteousness  that  he  may  now 
acquire  will  overcome.  The  result  is  that  he  is  in 
danger  of  being  discouraged  by  the  seeming  use- 
lessness  of  any  efforts  that  may  be  made  by  him 
to  reunite  himself  with  God. 

That  such  a  belief  in  the  unpardonable  nature 
of  sin  should  be  very  widely  entertained  was  to  be 
expected.  The  hmnan  race  has  been  educated  for 
untold  generations  to  regard  law  as  something 
which  cannot  be  broken  with  impunity.  The 
child  is  no  sooner  able  to  distinguish  right  from 


THE  ATONEMENT  275 

wrong  than  it  is  subjected  to  commands  and  pro- 
hibitions which  are  not  usually  to  be  set  at  naught 
without  punishment.  The  man  finds  himself 
hedged  in  on  every  side  by  civil  statutes,  of  which 
the  penalties  are  seldom,  if  ever,  relaxed.  He  be- 
comes familiar  with  the  cases  of  criminals  who  have 
long  evaded  the  pursuit  of  justice  and  have  even 
become  —  at  least,  to  all  outward  appearance  — 
respectable  citizens,  but  who  fall  at  last  into  the 
clutches  of  the  law  and  are  inexorably  condemned 
to  punislnnent.  He  sees  a  broken  ordinance  mer- 
cilessly exacting  retribution,  in  spite  of  the  suffer- 
ings of  innocent  women  and  children  whom  the 
culprit  has  involved  in  his  own  fall.  He  sees 
judges  who  are  naturally  compassionate  and  tender- 
hearted, who  even  shed  tears  when  it  becomes 
their  duty  to  pass  sentence  on  their  fellow  men, 
who,  nevertheless,  have  no  power  to  remit  punish- 
ment even  in  cases  where  clemency  would  seem 
to  be  demanded,  and  who  are  constrained  to 
trample  under  foot  every  private  instinct  of  hu- 
manity and  pity  in  the  name  of  justice  and  social 
order.  It  is  no  wonder,  then,  if  such  experiences, 
combined  with  whatever  influence  in  the  same  di- 
rection he  may  have  inherited  from  a  hundred 
generations  which  have  had  a  similar  education, 
make  law  to  him  synonymous  with  imjDlacable 
vengeance,  a  symbol  of  an  unappeasable  monster 
which  once  offended  can  never  be  satisfied  until 
the  delinquent  has  been  devoured.  The  character 
of  Javert   in  "  Les  Miserables  "  may  be  regarded 


276    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF   ORTHODOXY 

as  an  embodiment  of  tlie  spirit  of  the  criminal 
law,  and  liis  suicide  only  emphasizes  the  common 
belief  that  law  must  have  its  victim.  As  it  has 
generally  manifested  itself  in  human  history,  law 
is  an  impersonal,  inflexible  something,  which,  deaf 
to  all  entreaties,  to  all  promises  of  amendment,  to 
all  appeals  for  mercy  grounded  on  the  fact  of  a 
changed  life,  relentlessly  calls  for  retribution,  and 
which,  even  if  it  is  eluded,  knows  not  what  it  is  to 
forgive. 

It  is  but  natural  that  men,  having  been  born  and 
bred,  as  it  were,  with  this  conception  of  law,  hav- 
ing grown  up  in  a  social  atmosphere  that  was  sat- 
urated with  it,  should  have  a  similar  idea  of  the 
law  of  God ;  that  they  should  come  to  regard  it  as 
something  which  even  the  love  of  a  heavenly  Father 
cannot  mitigate.  It  is  not  strange  if,  when  re- 
morse is  painting  their  sins  in  the  darkest  colors, 
and  they  are  overawed  by  the  majesty  of  the  sub- 
lime Being  against  whom  they  have  offended,  they 
should  feel  that  the  immutable  ordinances  of  hea- 
ven exclude  them  from  all  hope  of  forgiveness. 
The  sense  of  alienation  from  God  which  possesses 
them  at  such  times,  the  conviction  that  they  are 
outcasts  from  his  presence,  is  associated  in  their 
minds  with  an  inability  to  forgive  themselves,  with 
a  feeling  that  they  are  justly  served,  and  that  they 
have  no  right  to  look  for  any  alleviation  of  their 
condition. 

That  such  a  view  of  the  attitude  of  God  towards 
them  is  logically  necessary  cannot  be  successfully 


THE   ATONEMENT  277 

maintained.  It  may  be  due  rather  to  the  phenom- 
enon of  association  of  ideas  than  to  any  process  of 
sound  reasoning,  to  an  assumed  analogy  between 
the  jurisprudence  of  earth  and  that  of  heaven 
rather  than  to  the  obvious  teachings  of  nature  and 
revelation.  Even  in  the  Old  Testament,  with  its  un- 
derlying law  according  to  which  a  New  Testament 
writer  could  "  almost  say  all  things  are  cleansed 
with  blood,  and  apart  from  shedding  of  blood  there 
is  no  remission,"  intimations  are  not  wanting  of 
the  efficacy  of  repentance  and  righteousness  when 
not  accompanied  by  expiatory  sacrifices.  One  of 
them  forms  the  central  idea  of  the  Book  of  Jonah. 
When  the  people  of  Nineveh  repented  of  their 
sins,  "  God  saw  their  works,  that  they  turned  from 
their  evil  way ;  and  God  repented  of  the  evil  which 
he  said  he  would  do  unto  them;  and  did  it  not." 
The  colloquy  between  Nathan  and  David  would 
seem  to  be  another  case  in  point.  "  And  David 
said  unto  Nathan,  I  have  sinned  against  the  Lord. 
And  Nathan  said  unto  David,  The  Lord  also  hath 
put  away  thy  sin  ;  thou  shalt  not  die."  No  diffi- 
culty in  the  way  of  divine  forgiveness  is  here  sug- 
gested ;  notliing  more  is  needed  apparently  as  a 
preparation  for  it  than  a  change  of  heart.  And 
Micah's  summary  of  religious  duty  is  of  a  like 
tenor :  "  He  hath  shewed  thee,  O  man,  what  is 
good  ;  and  what  doth  the  Lord  require  of  thee,  but 
to  do  justly,  and  to  love  mercy,  and  to  walk  humbly 
with  thy  God  ?  "  There  is  no  hint  in  these  words 
of  obstacles  to  salvation  which  must  be  removed 


278    THE   RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

by  something  besides  the  practice  of  the  virtues 
enjoined.  And  so  in  the  New  Testament.  The 
parable  of  the  Prodigal  Son  has  already  been 
referred  to.  The  Sermon  on  the  Mount  may  be 
cited  also,  which  calls  only  for  obedience,  and  says 
nothing  to  imply  that  this  will  not  of  itself  be 
sufficient. 

Nor  does  natural  religion  constrain  us  to  believe 
that  sin  is  essentially  unpardonable  or  can  be  par- 
doned only  with  difficulty.  It  is  possible  to  abuse 
the  human  system  until  it  becomes  a  hopeless 
wreck.  There  are  doubtless  limits  to  what  may 
be  called  the  forgiveness  of  nature.  But  how 
many  sins  against  the  laws  of  health  have  been 
remitted  as  a  result  of  simple  obedience !  How 
often  it  has  proved  true  when  the  health  has  been 
broken  by  excesses  that  it  may  be  restored  merely 
by  a  return  to  correct  habits !  If  we  regard  nat- 
ural law  as  only  the  established  method  of  divine 
action  in  the  material  world,  —  and  no  other  con- 
ception of  it  would  be  serviceable  in  the  present 
instance,  —  we  can  only  say  that  analogy  suggests 
the  possibility  of  a  man's  hopelessly  alienating  him- 
seK  from  God,  but  does  not  teach  that  repentance 
is  necessarily  incapable  of  winning  divine  pardon. 

Still,  even  if  a  man's  conviction  to  the  contrary 
does  not  correspond  to  any  external  reality,  it 
must  be  dealt  with  all  the  same.  Even  if  sin  cre- 
ates no  gulf  between  man  and  God  which  cannot 
be  bridged  by  a  penitent  life,  the  fact  that  most 
men  persistently   believe    otherwise    becomes   for 


THE  ATONEMENT  279 

them  as  serious  a  barrier  to  moral  reformation  and 
growtli  as  would  exist  if  it  were  true  that  the  Al- 
mighty could  not  forgive  even  a  penitent  man  with- 
out first  vindicating  his  distributive  justice  by  a 
miraculous  and  stupendous  sacrifice.  So  long  as 
men  are  convinced  that  there  are  difficulties  in  the 
way  of  their  salvation  which  no  effort  on  their  part 
can  remove,  it  makes  no  material  difference  whether 
these  are  imaginary  or  real,  subjective  or  objective, 
they  need  to  be  taken  out  of  the  way.  The  mental 
condition  itself  must  have  an  atonement.  In  other 
words,  before  the  man  can  feel  that  there  is  any 
encouragement  for  him  to  abandon  his  sin  and  to 
enter  into  a  life-long  battle  with  temptation,  some- 
thing must  happen,  some  influence  must  be  brought 
to  bear  on  him,  which  will  enable  him  to  rid  him- 
self of  the  fatal  idea  that  his  case  is  hopeless,  or  at 
least  of  discouraging  difficidty. 

Now  it  is  precisely  this  effect  which  the  death 
of  Christ,  when  taken  in  connection  with  his  whole 
extraordinary  career,  produces.  Even  if  it  did  not 
serve  to  annihilate  any  obstacle  to  human  welfare 
which  stood  in  the  way  of  God  himself,  —  a  point 
on  which  men  may  and  will  differ,  —  it  did  destroy 
an  impediment  to  religious  action  in  the  human 
mind,  and  by  so  doing  added  new  vigor  to  the  spir- 
itual growth  of  mankind. 

The  power  by  which  this  result  was  achieved 
resides  in  the  fact  that  remission  of  sins  has  been 
promised  in  connection  with  a  series  of  events 
which  is,  at  the  same  time,  so  impressive,  so  unique, 


280    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

and  so  mysterious  as  to  suggest  to  the  startled  im- 
agination endless  hopeful  possibilities.  A  being 
whose  character  has  furnished  the  most  highly  de- 
veloped portion  of  the  human  race  with  its  highest 
ethical  ideal,  whose  life  was  so  near  to  the  life  of 
God  that  it  seemed  to  emit  sparkles  of  omnipotence, 
whose  death,  according  to  all  accounts,  was  a  tran- 
sition to  a  visible  divine  glory,  whose  whole  history 
stamps  him  as  a  being  immeasurably  higher  than 
man,  whose  own  utterances  combined  with  those 
of  his  apostles  place  him  on  an  equality  with  God 
himseK,  who  is  regarded  by  ahnost  all  the  church 
as  an  incarnation  of  the  Deity,  has  declared  that 
his  self-sacrifice  has  rendered  possible  the  salvation 
of  every  soul. 

That  he  does  not  make  clear  in  what  manner  this 
effect  has  been  wrought  is  immaterial.  What  the 
penitent  man  needs  is  not  so  much  a  definite  and 
precise  explanation  of  the  process  by  which  God 
reconciles  his  grace  and  his  justice  as  the  ability  to 
believe  that  in  some  way  he  has  done  so ;  and  this 
can  be  had  in  the  cases  of  most  men  only  through 
the  aid  of  some  occurrence  which  is  impressive  and 
mysterious  enough  to  afford  an  unlimited  range  for 
speculation  and  hope.  The  more  discouraging  a 
man's  conception  of  the  implacability  of  law  is, 
the  vaster  needs  to  be  the  suggestiveness  of  the 
event  on  which  he  founds  his  expectation  of  divine 
pardon.  A  solemn  affirmation  that  the  way  is  open 
for  any  man  to  return  to  the  Father  has  been  made 
by  one  whose  personal  character  guarantees  his 


THE  ATONEMENT  281 

veracity,  and  tlie  circumstances  of  whose  life  are 
calculated  to  forestall  all  doubt  as  to  his  know- 
ledge. The  statement  has  been  emphasized  and 
enforced  by  such  evidences  of  supernal  power  and 
wisdom  in  him  who  made  it  as  may  well  disarm 
any  objection  growing  out  of  the  supposed  diffi- 
culty or  impossibility  of  the  result  said  to  have 
been  accomplished.  The  life,  death,  and  resur- 
rection of  Jesus,  his  miracles,  his  ethical  teachings, 
the  sublime  origin  ascribed  to  him,  afford  a  new 
and  larger  idea  of  the  divine  resources,  as  it  were, 
and  thus  encourage  the  belief  that  even  so  arduous 
a  work  as  human  salvation  is  apt  to  seem  to  him 
who  most  feels  his  need  of  it  may  not,  after  all,  be 
too  hard  for  God. 

It  is  not  necessary,  therefore,  to  insist,  in  order 
to  save  the  supposed  implication  of  certain  Scrip- 
ture texts,  that  it  is  impossible  for  God  to  pardon 
sin  on  the  mere  condition  of  repentance,  that  the 
way  to  his  favor  has  not  always  been  as  open  as 
was  that  of  the  returning  prodigal  to  his  early 
home.  Nor  need  we  be  especially  concerned  to 
deny  that  such  is  the  case.  Whether  this  view  be 
correct  or  not,  the  texts  referred  to  are  equally 
useful  and  necessary.  They  meet  a  demand  of 
human  nature.  Adapting  themselves  to  the  con- 
victions of  the  great  mass  of  humanity,  irrespective 
of  the  question  as  to  the  soundness  of  these  con- 
victions, they  express  an  inspiring  truth  in  lan- 
guage which  satisfies  the  cravings  of  innumerable 
hearts.     Doing  away  with  the  depressing  fear  that 


282    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

sin  is  virtually  unpardonable  by  the  assurance  that 
an  act  of  commensurate  magnitude  on  the  part  of 
God  has  rendered  it  pardonable,  these  passages 
impart  an  equal  stimulus  to  the  soul  that  receives 
them  whether  the  obstacle,  which  according  to 
their  teaching  has  been  surmounted,  had  its  exist- 
ence in  the  mind  of  God  or  only  in  the  erroneous 
theological  opinions  of  men. 

That  human  curiosity  woidd  be  active  in  regard 
to  the  details  of  the  process  of  reconciliation,  the 
very  nature  of  the  human  mind  would  lead  us  to 
expect,  and,  as  already  intimated,  the  explanations 
adopted  would  take  their  color  from  the  different 
impressions  made  on  human  minds  by  sin  itself. 
If,  owing  to  previous  education  or  a  native  mental 
tendency,  a  man  should  refer  the  supposed  desper- 
ateness  of  his  spiritual  outlook  to  the  dominion 
which  a  powerful  evil  spirit  had  secured  over  him, 
he  would  naturally  be  inclined  to  accept  the  theory 
of  the  Atonement  first  given.  If,  for  any  reason, 
his  moral  condition  should  seem  to  him  analogous 
to  the  condition  of  an  insolvent  debtor,  he  would 
prefer  the  second.  If  his  conception  of  God  as 
a  ruler  should  suggest  certain  f)arallels  to  his  own 
case  in  civil  governments,  he  would  be  drawn  to 
the  third.  While,  if  he  saw  no  hindrances  to 
divine  forgiveness  save  his  own  impenitence  and 
perverse  moral  temperament,  the  fourth  alone 
would  have  any  attractions  for  him.  These  various 
explanations  of  the  way  in  which  Christ  saves  men 
bear  no  resemblance  to  one  another.     Not  one  of 


THE  ATONEMENT  283 

tliem,  as  already  pointed  out,  is  free  from  objec- 
tions. Every  one  of  them,  no  doubt,  has  been  of 
immense  service  to  Christianity.  We  should  natu- 
rally infer,  therefore,  that  all  of  them  are  in  some 
sense  true,  though  each  one  of  them  is  in  some 
respects  false.  The  one  point  in  which  they  all 
agree  is  this :  that  whatever  the  obstacle  may  be 
which  stands  in  the  way  of  divine  grace,  whether 
it  be  in  the  law  of  God  or  only  in  the  mind  of  the 
transgressor,  it  need  cause  no  trouble  to  him  who 
is  willing  to  live  a  true  life.  Theologians  may 
argue  and  speculate  as  to  the  grounds  on  which 
sin  is  remitted,  but  practical  religion  has  no  con- 
cern with  the  results  which  they  may  reach.  Its 
purposes  are  amply  served  by  the  fact  that  the 
figures,  the  language,  the  promises  which  are  asso- 
ciated with  the  Atonement,  suffice  to  free  minds 
of  every  class  from  the  fear  that  sin  has  raised 
between  them  and  God  a  barrier  which  cannot 
be  torn  down. 

This  may  be  called  the  subjective  theory  of  the 
Atonement,  and  the  various  teachings  of  the  Scrip- 
tures on  this  subject  may  easily  be  interpreted  in 
harmony  with  it.  It  explains  the  prominence 
which  is  given  to  the  blood  of  Christ  in  the  New 
Testament.  Whatever  may  have  been  the  original 
meaning  and  purpose  of  animal  or  human  sacrifices, 
they  came  at  last  to  have  an  expiatory  signifi- 
cance. They  tacitly  recognized  the  existence  of 
a  chasm  between  man  and  God  which  could  only 
be  bridged  by  suffering.     It  may  not  be  necessary 


284    THE   RATIONAL  BASIS  OF   ORTHODOXY 

again  to  suggest  that  this  chasm  may  have  been 
wholly  imaginary,  or  to  affirm  that  it  would  be 
none  the  less  discouraging  on  that  account.  The 
vail  which  barred  the  chosen  people  from  the  Holy 
of  Holies  may  have  been  only  a  visible  symbol 
of  a  subjective  condition ;  its  effect  on  their  feel- 
ings, however,  would  not  have  been  different  had  it 
represented  an  actual  barrier  outside  of  themselves 
which  God  had  placed  between  them  and  himseK. 
If  the  ethical  commandments  of  the  Mosaic  code 
had  not  been  supplemented  by  a  ritual  of  blood, 
the  sense  of  estrangement  from  Jehovah  which  had 
thus  already  found  expression  in  a  material  symbol 
must  have  led,  before  the  moral  life  of  the  nation 
became  fixed,  to  a  general  abandonment  of  the  law. 
Without  something  in  their  religion  to  mitigate 
their  feeling  of  alienation  from  God,  without  the 
agency  of  sacrifices,  which  had  come  to  be  used  so 
generally  in  the  world  as  propitiatory  rites,  it  does 
not  seem  probable  that  the  children  of  Israel 
would  have  retained  their  belief  that  they  were,  in 
a  special  sense,  the  people  of  God,  or  would  have 
had  faith  enough  to  cling  to  a  law  which  had  been 
hopelessly  broken  so  many  times.  But  for  their 
sacrificial  rites,  which  seemed  to  them  in  some 
measure  to  keep  Jehovah  in  touch  with  them  not- 
withstanding repeated  transgressions  on  their  part, 
the  casting  away  of  the  tables  of  stone  by  Moses 
because  of  a  single  act  of  popular  disobedience 
would  have  been  prophetic  of  the  fate  which  their 
law  would  have  encountered  in  time  at  the  hands 
of  the  whole  people. 


THE  ATONEMENT  285 

It  was  to  Jews  and  pagans  familiar  with  the 
expiatory  meaning  and  use  of  blood,  to  cults  which 
deemed  sacrifices  inseparable  from  effective  wor- 
ship, that  the  gospel  came.  With  these  religious 
preconceptions  it  must  reckon.  It  must  meet  that 
craving  for  reconciliation  with  heaven  which  had 
learned  to  still  itself  to  some  extent  with  the  pain 
of  a  dying  victim.  Apart  from  any  influence 
which  the  tragic  sufferings  of  Christ  may  be  sup- 
posed by  some  to  have  had  on  the  governmental 
action  of  God,  they  were  necessary  in  order  to 
meet  the  demands  of  human  nature.  An  atone- 
ment without  blood  must  have  failed  to  win  accept- 
ance with  Jew  and  Gentile  alike. 

The  different  aspects  in  which  Christ  is  pre- 
sented to  men  in  the  New  Testament  appeal  to  as 
many  wants  and  desires  of  their  moral  nature. 
He  is  called,  or  calls  himself,  by  names  which  are 
so  numerous  and  so  suggestive  that  no  need  of  the 
human  soul  would  seem  to  have  been  forgotten,  no 
figure  to  have  been  neglected  which  would  make 
real  his  redemptive  work  to  any  man.  He  is 
Bread,  Light,  the  Fountain-head  of  Living  Water ; 
he  is  a  Propitiation,  a  Ransom,  a  Mediator,  an 
Advocate,  a  Redeemer ;  he  is  a  Corner-stone,  a 
Foundation,  a  Door ;  he  is  a  Shepherd,  a  High 
Priest,  a  Bishop  ;  he  is  the  Resurrection,  the  Way, 
the  Truth,  the  Life.  Whatever  may  be  the  truth 
which  any  man  needs  specially  to  believe  in  order 
to  have  the  courage  to  commit  himself  to  the  life- 
long guidance  of  his  highest  spiritual  impulses,  it 


286    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

will  be  found  expressed  in  some  one  or  more  of  the 
attributes  or  offices  ascribed  to  Christ.  The  dis- 
eases of  the  soul  are  as  various  as  those  of  the 
body  and  require  as  many  different  remedies.  The 
imagination  clothes  the  vague  yearnings  of  the 
spiritual  nature  in  all  manner  of  forms  which  are 
borrowed  from  the  analogies  of  physical  and  mental 
experiences.  The  Atonement  recognizes  them  all, 
and  offers  the  appropriate  healing  medicines.  If 
a  man  conceives  that  he  is  separated  from  God 
by  his  want  of  a  righteousness  for  which  he  hun- 
gers and  thirsts,  Christ  comes  to  him  as  the  Bread 
which  came  down  from  heaven  and  as  the  giver 
of  a  well  of  water  springing  up  unto  eternal  life. 
If  he  is  kept  from  his  Maker  by  his  sense  of  the 
awful  contrast  which  exists  between  his  character 
and  that  of  the  Most  High,  Christ  is  offered  to 
him  as  a  Mediator  and  as  an  Advocate  with  the 
Father.  If  he  cannot  rid  himself  of  the  idea  that 
it  will  be  hard  for  the  Almighty  to  lay  aside  the 
deep  resentment  which  he  cherishes  towards  him 
on  account  of  his  many  sins,  Christ  is  declared  to 
be  a  Propitiation  for  them.  If  his  difficulties  are 
intellectual  and  he  is  troubled  to  know,  amid  the 
manifold  collisions  of  human  opinion,  on  what  he 
may  build  a  life  that  will  lift  him  up  into  the 
knowledge  of  God  and  the  light  of  eternal  truth, 
Christ  is  presented  to  him  as  the  Foundation  and 
the  Chief  Corner-stone.  And  so  with  the  other 
titles  and  powers  ascribed  to  the  Son  of  man. 
Some  of  these  will  prove  helpful  to  one  class  of 


THE  ATONEMENT  287 

persons  and  some  to  those  of  a  different  class; 
and  tlie  private  definitions  and  conceptions  of  the 
Atonement,  its  practical  bearings  on  human  con- 
duct, will  be  as  multifarious  as  are  the  facets  of 
many-sided  human  nature  with  which  it  comes  in 
contact;  but  in  point  of  fact  it  will  be  found  to 
be  a  broad  generalization  which  covers  every  need 
of  the  soul  and  anticipates  every  rhetorical  expres- 
sion in  which  a  spiritual  want  may  clothe  itself. 

By  as  much,  therefore,  as  we  are  constrained  to 
admit  that  the  moral  discouragement  which  is 
almost  inseparable  from  a  sense  of  sin  is  a  seri- 
ous drawback  to  the  proper  ethical  development 
of  the  human  race,  and  that  it  can  be  effectually 
removed  only  by  some  assurance  which  has  obvi- 
ously behind  it  the  authority  of  God,  by  so  much 
are  we  impelled  to  recognize  still  another  knot  in 
the  drama  of  man's  evolution  and  a  new  reason  to 
anticipate  a  miraculous  intervention  in  his  behalf. 


CHAPTER  XI 

JUSTIFICATION   BY   FAITH    (PSYCHOLOGICAL) 

Christianity  aims  to  promote  disinterested 
conduct.  The  virtue  which  it  inculcates  is  unself- 
ishness. Its  moral  ideal  is  a  love  which  seeketh 
not  its  own.  The  Christian  must  not  be  content 
to  do  good  to  those  who  do  good  to  him,  to  lend 
to  those  of  whom  he  hopes  to  receive,  to  invite  to 
his  feast  those  who  can  make  him  a  recompense 
by  bidding  him  in  return.  Well-doing,  according 
to  the  gospel,  cannot  be  grounded  in  the  expec- 
tation of  reward.  Goodness,  to  be  approved  by 
Christ,  must  be  cultivated  for  other  than  personal 
ends. 

The  righteousness  which  is  commended  in  the 
New  Testament  is,  in  a  peculiar  sense,  divine ;  it 
is  called  the  righteousness  of  God.  It  contains 
elements  which  distinguish  it  broadly  from  much 
that  passes  current  in  the  world  as  goodness.  Men 
may  be  ignorant  of  it  even  while  possessing  a  cer- 
tain zeal  for  God  and  seeking  to  establish  a  right- 
eousness of  their  own.  It  exceeds  that  of  the  con- 
ventional moral  standards  of  the  time  of  Christ  by 
as  much  as  spiritual  success  surpasses  spiritual 
failure  ;  "I  say  unto  you,  that  except  your  right- 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH  289 

eousness  shall  exceed  the  righteousness  of  the 
scribes  and  Pharisees,  ye  shall  in  no  wise  enter  into 
the  kingdom  of  heaven."  It  is  a  benevolent,  un- 
selfish principle  of  action,  a  love  which  is  superior 
to  the  promptings  of  self-interest  and  native  im- 
pulse. He  who  has  it  in  its  perfection  is  equal  to 
the  task  of  blessing  those  that  curse  him,  of  doing 
good  to  those  that  hate  him,  of  praying  for  those 
that  persecute  him.  It  has  found  emphatic  ex- 
pression in  the  apostle's  words,  "  I  could  wish  that 
I  myself  were  anathema  from  Christ  for  my  bre- 
thren's sake,  my  kinsmen  according  to  the  flesh." 
Whatever  appeals  to  selfish  motives  the  gospel 
may  seem  to  make  in  its  promises  and  threats,  its 
ultimate  aim  is  to  lay  the  foundations  of  human 
character  in  a  love  which  casteth  out  fear,  in  a 
virtue  which  is  not  open  to  the  sneer,  "  Doth  Job 
fear  God  for  naught  ?  "  "  Christ  died  for  aU,  that 
they  which  live  should  no  longer  live  unto  them- 
selves, but  unto  him  who  for  their  sakes  died  and 
rose  again." 

The  conception  of  moral  obligation  which  has 
just  been  outlined  is  recognized  as  sound  by  the 
ethical  philosophy  of  the  present  time.  What  is 
caUed  "  altruism  "  in  current  discussions  of  human 
duty  and  of  moral  evolution  is  generally  only 
another  name  for  the  unselfish  conduct  inculcated 
by  Christianity.  The  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  the 
thirteenth  chapter  of  First  Corinthians,  are  com- 
monly accepted  by  writers  on  ethics  as  embody- 
ing correct  ethical  ideals.     It  may  be  confidently 


290    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

expected  that  the  New  Testament  conception  of 
righteousness  will  eventually  be  adopted  by  all 
religions  and  by  every  moral  philosophy. 

Two  obstacles  stand  in  the  way  of  every  one  who 
is  disposed  to  acquire  such  a  righteousness  as  has 
just  been  described.  One  of  them  is  found  in  the 
tendency  of  sin  to  make  moral  and  religious  con- 
duct selfish,  to  degrade  the  ideals  even  of  those 
who  are  ambitious  to  please  God.  It  is  to  the 
consideration  of  this  that  the  present  chapter  is 
devoted. 

All  men  are  naturally  under  some  moral  law. 
It  may  be  written  and  elaborate,  it  may  be  unwrit- 
ten and  incomplete,  it  may  be  only  a  vague  sus- 
picion that  one  ought  to  do  better  than  he  is  doing. 
By  the  deeds  of  the  law  Paul  means  primarily 
those  wrought  in  obedience  to  the  Jewish  code, 
although  to  those  prescribed  by  the  Gentile  con- 
science he  would  not  refuse  the  name.  The  idea 
of  law  which  he  had  in  mind  while  writing  his 
epistles  seems  to  be  a  certain  standard  of  moral 
action  through  perfect  conformity  to  which  the 
divine  favor  could  be  obtained.  It  is  essentially 
characteristic  of  all  law  to  be  satisfied  with  nothing 
less  than  a  perfect  observance  of  aU  its  require- 
ments. Whoever,  therefore,  is  seeking  peace  with 
God  through  complete  obedience  to  special  moral 
obligations  which  sum  up  his  idea  of  religious 
duty,  whether  they  have  previously  been  given  in 
writing  or  only  represent  the  utterances  of  his  own 
conscience,  is  living,  according  to  the  spirit  of 
Paul's  teachings,  under  a  religious  law. 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH  291 

There  is  necessarily  a  tlireat  in  every  moral  law. 
The  code  of  Moses  expressly  denounced  a  curse 
against  every  one  who  should  not  continue  in  all 
the  things  written  in  the  book  of  the  law  to  do 
them.  But  the  comminatory  element  is  not  want- 
ing even  where  the  law  is  simply  the  particular 
standard  of  righteousness  set  up  by  individual  con- 
sciences. In  this  there  is  a  latent  menace  which 
is  brought  to  the  surface  by  every  act  of  disobe- 
dience. No  man  can  believe  it  to  be  his  duty  to 
conform  perfectly  to  a  certain  rule  of  moral  con- 
duct without  feeling,  in  times  of  temptation,  that 
he  is  treading  on  dangerous  ground.  He  cannot 
fail  to  entertain  the  suspicion  that  disagreeable 
consequences  will  accrue  to  him  from  any  disloy- 
alty on  his  part  to  his  sense  of  right ;  and  this  will 
have  for  him  all  the  force  of  an  authoritative 
warning  against  wrong-doing.  It  makes  no  par- 
ticular difference  whether  it  is  due  to  a  natural 
association  of  ideas  of  the  kind  explained  in  the 
last  chapter,  to  the  results  of  previous  experiences, 
or  to  a  direct  communication  from  God  ;  the  fact 
that  he  has  it  will  have  its  influence  and  must 
be  dealt  with  accordingly.  Whether,  therefore,  a 
man  derives  his  sense  of  duty  from  the  Mosaic 
statutes  or  from  his  inbred  ideas  of  moral  obliga- 
tion, he  is  to  all  intents  and  purposes  under  a  law 
which  he  feels  he  cannot  break  without  exposing 
himself  to  evil  consequences. 

A  perfect  man,  whose  virtue  had  been  confirmed 
by  time  and  practice,  would  remain  perfect  under 


292    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

the  strictest  moral  law  that  could  be  imposed  upon 
him.  There  would  be  a  just  proportion  between 
his  moral  powers  and  his  moral  obligations. 
Riofhteousness  would  be  natural  to  him  and  there- 
fore  easy.  Neither  would  it  be  a  matter  of  any- 
practical  concern  to  him  that  sin  has  been  authori- 
tatively forbidden  with  threats.  Having  no  dis- 
position or  desire  to  commit  it,  his  conduct  would 
not  be  influenced  by  denunciations  against  it. 
There  would  be  no  point  of  contact  between  him 
and  the  comminatory  plirases  of  the  law.  He 
would  continue  perfect  because  he  would  love  to 
be  perfect,  because  he  would  have  no  inclination 
to  cease  from  being  so.  He  would  be,  therefore, 
as  really  independent  of  the  law  as  he  would  be 
were  he  not  living  under  it.  No  man  who  has  no 
desire  to  kill  feels  that  his  liberty  is  abridged  by 
civil  statutes  against  murder.  No  truly  honest 
man  is  influenced  in  his  conduct  by  legislative  en- 
actments against  stealing.  No  truthful  man  gives 
his  evidence  in  a  court  of  justice  with  any  thought 
of  the  penalties  attached  to  perjury.  A  good  man 
refrains  from  killing  or  stealing  or  bearing  false 
witness,  not  because  it  wiU  be  dangerous  for  him 
to  commit  these  crimes,  not  because  the  law  wiU 
punish  him  if  he  perpetrates  them,  but  because  he 
loves  virtue  too  well  to  transgress  its  requirements. 
And  so  a  person  of  confirmed  perfection  of  char- 
acter, living  under  the  comprehensive  law  of  God, 
would  be  as  untrammeled  by  selfish  motives  in  his 
moral  conduct   as  he  would  be  if  he  had   never 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH  293 

heard  of  such  a  thing  as  a  threat  against  wrong- 
doing. He  would  obey  God  because  he  would 
love  to  obey  him.  There  would  be  no  room  in  his 
soul  for  a  selfish  conception  of  duty.  When  a 
ship  is  making  good  headway  under  steam  she  does 
not  usually  carry  sail,  for  she  is  already  moving 
faster  than  the  wind.  There  is  no  motive  power 
in  a  stern  breeze  blowing  five  or  ten  knots  an  hour 
for  a  vessel  which  is  already  making  fifteen  or 
twenty.  And  so  it  would  be  bootless  to  try  to  get 
a  man  to  serve  God  by  picturing  to  him  the  ter- 
rible consequences  of  sin  if  he  is  already  serving 
him  perfectly  from  love  of  holiness.  Perfect  love 
has  cast  out  fear  as  a  moral  incentive,  or  rather 
has  kept  it  from  manifesting  itself,  by  propelling 
the  soul  beyond  its  reach.  He  may  use  the  law 
educationally,  that  is,  as  a  means  of  ascertaining 
what  specific  moral  acts  he  ought  to  perform  ;  but 
when  these  have  been  learned  he  will  do  them 
gladly  and  with  no  thought  of  the  danger  of  leav- 
ing them  undone.  It  is  only  in  this  way  and  to 
such  a  person  that  righteousness  can  come  through 
the  law. 

But  if  the  person  who  has  just  been  described 
should,  for  any  cause,  commit  a  single  sin,  the  face 
of  his  moral  affairs  would  be  whoUy  changed,  a 
complete  revolution  would  be  wrought  in  his  moral 
character.  A  sense  of  iU-desert  would  become 
lodged  within  him.  He  would  be  unable  to  think 
of  God  or  of  his  spiritual  outlook  without  misgiv- 
ings.    He  would  be  powerless  to  banish  from  his 


294    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

mind  the  suspicion  that  he  was  in  danger  of  never 
recovering  his  inward  peace,  of  losing  heaven  in 
fact.  A  feehng  of  insecurity,  which  could  never 
have  found  its  way  into  the  consciousness  of  a 
perfect  man  for  the  want  of  anything  in  him  to 
create  it,  would  become  a  permanent  fixture  in  the 
soul  of  one  who  had  once  transgressed  the  law  of 
duty.  He  would  no  longer  be  able  to  regard  the 
rewards  of  righteousness  as  blessings  that  would 
fall  to  him  as  a  matter  of  course.  The  possibility 
that  he  had  forfeited  them  altogether  would  be 
infallibly  suggested  to  him  by  the  fact  that  he  had 
lost  his  perfect  innocence. 

The  effect  thus  produced  upon  his  character 
would  be  radical  and  pronounced.  It  would 
amount  to  nothing  less  than  a  complete  moral 
overturn,  a  substitution  of  selfish  for  unselfish 
considerations  as  a  ground  of  moral  action ;  for  as 
heaven  must  now  be  conceived  by  him  as  some- 
thing that  is  liable  to  be  lost,  it  wiU  seem  to  him 
eminently  a  thing  to  make  sure  of.  Hence  the 
rewards  of  virtue  will  assume  greater  importance 
in  his  eyes  than  virtue  itself,  for  he  knows  that  a 
failure  to  obtain  them  will  be  fatal  to  his  hap- 
piness. A  single  transgression  by  making  him 
feel  unsafe  has  lifted  the  thought  of  his  safety  to 
the  chief  place  among  his  rehgious  motives.  The 
foundations  of  his  character  have  been  shifted  from 
love  of  righteousness  to  love  of  self. 

To  illustrate  :  a  man  may  pursue  a  trade  or  a 
craft  from  pure  love  for  it  so  long  as  his  circum- 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH  295 

stances  are  such  as  to  preclude  the  idea  of  his  ever 
coming  to  want ;  but  let  him  lose  his  property,  let 
him,  as  a  result,  become  anxious  as  to  his  future 
means  of  subsistence,  and  his  calling  will  cease  to 
be  altogether  or  chiefly  a  recreation.  It  will  be 
in  danger  of  degenerating  into  a  wholly  mercenary 
pursuit,  into  a  sordid  means  of  earning  his  bread 
and  butter ;  and  his  prevailing  inquiry  concerning 
it  will  be  likely  to  be,  not.  How  shall  I  conduct  it 
so  as  to  bring  out,  by  means  of  it,  the  best  that  is 
in  me,  but.  How  shall  I  manage  it  so  as  to  make 
the  most  money  out  of  it  ?  The  artist,  in  such  a 
case,  will  be  tempted  to  lower  his  standards  to  the 
level  of  a  vulgar  taste  ;  the  author  will  be  in  dan- 
ger of  forsaking  the  truth  in  order  to  cater  to  the 
literary  whims  of  the  multitude.  Self-interest  is 
brought  to  the  forefront  as  a  motive,  and,  as  a 
result,  it  leaves  its  impress  on  the  quality  of  the 
subsequent  work. 

And  so  a  man  would  practice  righteousness  in 
utter  self-forgetfulness  and  in  a  spirit  of  the  purest 
love  so  long  as  perfect  innocence  should  keep  him 
free  from  the  thought  of  spiritual  peril ;  but  let 
him  feel  that  his  moral  failures  have  clouded  his 
prospects  of  reaching  heaven  and  the  quality  of 
his  moral  conduct  will  deteriorate.  Holiness  will 
practically  cease  to  be  in  his  estimation  something 
to  be  cultivated  for  its  own  sake.  He  wiU  view  it 
as  a  species  of  investment,  as  a  means  of  obtaining 
present  comfort  and  future  happiness.  In  one  of 
La  Fontaine's  fables,  a  poor  cobbler  who  disturbs 


296    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

a  rich  banker  by  his  ceaseless  songs  is  silenced  by 
a  gift  of  money.  He  has  now  something  to  lose, 
and  liis  anxiety  about  it  takes  from  him  all  desire 
to  sing.  So  when  heaven  is  apprehended  by  a 
man  chiefly  as  something  which  he  is  liable  to  lose, 
the  fear  of  falling  short  of  it  plucks  the  element 
of  joy  out  of  his  virtue  and  imparts  a  selfish  hue  to 
his  whole  conception  of  righteousness.  Obedience 
to  God  he  views  as  a  means  of  benefiting  himself. 
He  may  be  a  moral  man,  —  that  is,  he  may  con- 
form to  the  standard  of  outward  deportment  which 
is  recognized  in  the  community  in  which  he  lives ; 
but  his  conduct  proceeds  from  motives  which 
derive  their  ethical  complexion  from  his  predomi- 
nant interest  in  himself. 

This  is  the  state  in  which  every  man  must 
find  himself  when  he  begins  to  concern  himself 
about  his  moral  condition  and  spiritual  destiny. 
Whether  he  be  Jew  or  Gentile,  his  knowledge  of 
the  fact  that  he  has  disobeyed  the  moral  law  under 
which  he  lives  has  made  him  sensible  of  the  threat 
expressed  or  implied  in  it.  He  cannot  but  fear 
lest,  having  failed  to  do  all  that  he  ought  to  have 
done,  the  best  that  he  can  now  do  will  not  be 
enough  to  win  divine  favor.  Consequently,  his 
distinctively  religious  acts  proceed  from  his  dread 
of  personal  loss.  The  desire  to  be  safe  influences 
him  in  aU  his  efforts  to  serve  God.  He  does  not 
regard  salvation  as  deliverance  from  sin  so  much 
as  exemption  from  the  penalties  and  consequences 
of  sin.     His  anxiety  about  his  future  welfare  out- 


JUSTIFICATION   BY  FAITH  297 

weighs,  as  a  principle  of  action,  his  desire  for 
holiness.  His  virtue,  therefore,  is  selfish  and  con- 
sequently is  not,  in  the  Christian  sense,  virtue  at 
all.  His  excessive  eagerness  to  make  sure  of  hea- 
ven, or  of  the  friendship  of  the  heavenly  powers, 
defeats  itself  as  a  morally  purifying  influence  by 
lending  a  mercenary  hue  to  all  his  religious  con- 
duct. 

How,  then,  is  one  who  has  brought  himself  into 
this  condition  to  escape  from  it  ?  When  he  feels 
that  his  moral  imperfections  have  exposed  him  to 
the  dangers  which  he  deems  inseparable  from  a 
broken  law,  how  is  this  fact  to  be  deprived  of  its 
natural  tendency  to  promote  a  selfish  desire  for 
personal  safety  and  happiness  to  the  position  of  a 
supreme  religious  motive  ? 

It  will  be  useless  to  exhort  him  to  forget  him- 
seK  and  his  fears  and  to  act  without  reference 
to  his  spiritual  misgivings.  His  sense  of  danger 
will  swallow  up  all  other  considerations.  It  will 
ordinarily  be  futile  to  advise  a  person  walking  on 
slippery  ice  to  dismiss  all  fear  of  falling,  or  to  bid 
one  who  is  reeling  with  giddiness  on  the  edge  of 
a  precipice  to  exercise  a  better  control  over  his 
nerves.  A  feehng  of  terror  has  made  both  insen- 
sible to  all  other  motives.  It  has  rudely  taken  pre- 
cedence of  all  more  rational  incentives  to  action. 
And  so  the  fear  of  losing  the  divine  favor  and 
eternal  happiness  will  render  him  who  feels  it  deaf 
to  all  encouraging  exhortations.  No  one  who  sus- 
pects that  his  salvation  is  not  assured  will  fail  to 


298    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

be  influenced  unfavorably  in  bis  religious  action 
by  bis  sense  o£  spiritual  peril. 

Tbere  would  seem,  tben,  to  be  no  way  to  effect 
the  moral  reformation  of  one  who  is  conscious  of 
sin  save  by  removing  the  cause  of  his  alarm. 
What  he  needs  in  order  to  become  free  to  practice 
virtue  for  its  own  sake  is  immunity  from  the  fear  of 
failure.  He  must  be  convinced  that  he  is  safe,  that* 
whether  he  is  succeeding  well  or  ill  in  his  efforts 
to  purify  his  character,  he  will  not  in  the  end  be 
excluded  from  the  kingdom  of  God.  Many  a  man 
who  has  in  him  the  making  of  a  good  workman 
will  forget  his  cunning  if  his  employer's  eye  is 
upon  him  and  he  feels  that  a  blunder  will  cost  him 
his  place.  He  needs  to  be  left  to  himself,  to  be 
freed  from  everything  that  is  likely  to  make  him 
timid  and  nervous,  in  order  that  he  may  act  natu- 
rally. So,  many  a  man  whose  life  would  be  a 
moral  failure  if  he  believed  that  his  faults  were 
being  treasured  up  against  him  by  an  offended 
God  and  were  destroying  all  his  prospects  of  reach- 
ing heaven  would  leave  behind  him  an  altogether 
different  record  if  he  could  feel  that  his  moral 
awkwardness  was  not  rendering  him  any  the  less 
certain  to  win  his  salvation  in  the  end. 

Now  it  is  to  this  very  fact  that  the  mission  of 
Christ  bears  an  appropriate  relation.  It  was  to 
enable  men  who  might  be  attracted  by  the  beauty 
of  holiness  or  repelled  by  the  ugliness  of  sin  to  ac- 
quire a  genuine,  unselfish  righteousness  that  the 
gospel  has  been  proclaimed.     To  use  the  phrase- 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH  299 

ology  of  a  previous  illustration,  its  purpose  was,  in 
part,  to  relieve  the  apprentices  of  God  from  aU 
spiritual  nervousness  and  unnaturalness  in  order 
that  they  might  do  their  best  work  in  achieving  a 
likeness  to  the  divine  character.  An  affirmation 
was  made  in  the  earth  under  circumstances  which 
have  riveted  upon  it  the  attention  of  more  than 
haK  a  hundred  generations  that  God  so  loved  the 
world,  that  he  gave  his  only  begotten  Son,  that 
whosoever  belie veth  in  him  should  not  perish, 
but  have  everlasting  life.  The  assertion  has  been 
made  with  many  impressive  accompaniments  that 
he  who  believeth  in  Jesus  Christ  hath  (already) 
eternal  life,  and  cometh  not  into  judgment,  but 
hath  passed  out  of  death  into  life.  To  all  who  are 
willing  to  cultivate  that  spirit  of  disinterested  love 
which  is  the  only  true  righteousness,  Christianity 
declares  that  for  them  there  is  no  law,  that  their 
spiritual  safety  is  not  conditioned  on  their  ability 
to  attain  a  certain  standard  of  moral  excellence, 
but  that  faith  is  reckoned  to  them  for  righteous- 
ness. It  affirms  that  the  honest  acceptance  of 
Christ  as  a  religious  guide  wiU  assure  to  them  the 
blessings  which  they  have  been  wont  to  associate 
with  perfect  obedience  to  the  law  of  duty.  For 
him  who  is  disposed  to  practice  holiness  for  its  own 
sake  the  law  is  declared  to  have  been  virtually 
repealed  in  order  that  it  may  not  make  selfish  and 
therefore  frustrate  the  moral  efforts  which  he  pur- 
poses to  put  forth.  Such  is  the  teaching  of  Chris- 
tianity in  the  texts,  "  There  is  no  condemnation  to 


300    THE   RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

them  which  are  in  Christ  Jesus;"  "The  law  of 
the  spirit  of  life  in  Christ  Jesus  made  me  free  from 
the  law  of  sin  and  death ;  "  "  If  ye  are  led  by 
the  Spirit,  ye  are  not  under  the  law ;  "  "Ye  are  not 
under  law,  but  under  grace." 

Evidently  there  is  no  way  to  come  out  from 
under  the  law  save  by  believing  the  only  being 
who  has  given  any  show  of  authority  to  the  decla- 
ration that  it  is  possible  to  be  freed  from  it.  The 
earnestness  with  which  faith  is  enjoined  through- 
out the  Bible  and  the  commendations  which  the 
sacred  writers  uniformly  bestow  upon  it  are  ex- 
plained, to  a  large  extent,  by  the  all-important  fact 
that  it  is  only  by  the  exercise  of  faith  that  one 
can  put  himself  into  the  condition  which  will  be 
most  favorable  to  his  own  spiritual  development, 
that  one  will  no  longer  be  obliged  to  associate 
with  thoughts  of  duty  any  demoralizing  consid- 
erations suggested  by  the  menaces  of  a  broken 
moral  law. 

The  doctrine  we  are  now  considering  may  be 
further  illustrated,  on  its  psychological  side,  by  the 
case  of  a  man  who  has  fallen  into  the  water.  He 
is  safe  if  he  will  dismiss  all  thought  of  danger ;  for 
his  body  is  lighter  than  the  element  in  which  it 
is  submerged,  and  will  float  if  he  will  allow  it  to 
do  so.  Every  pupil  at  a  swimming-school  is  likely 
to  be  taught  so  much  regarding  himself  in  his  very 
first  lesson.  Moreover,  man,  like  almost  every 
other  animal,  is  a  natural  swimmer,  and,  in  the 
case  just  supposed,  he  needs  only  to  put  in  practice 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH  301 

an  Instinctive  art  in  order  to  get  ashore.  If  he 
has  faith  enough  in  these  two  facts  to  act  upon 
them,  it  will  save  him.  But  if  he  is  influenced 
only  by  the  fear  of  death,  he  will  raise  his  arms 
above  his  head  and  so  depress  his  centre  of  gravity. 
The  very  efforts  which  he  will  make  to  preserve 
his  life  will  only  force  him  beneath  the  surface. 

The  gospel  declares  that  there  is  no  condemna- 
tion to  them  that  are  in  Christ  Jesus.  It  implies, 
also,  that  perfection  of  character  is  within  ultimate 
reach  of  human  effort.  If  any  man  will  put  con- 
fidence in  these  two  propositions  and  serve  God 
in  order  to  make  progress  in  righteousness  rather 
than  for  the  purpose  of  freeing  his  soul  from  jeop- 
ardy, his  salvation  is  assured,  and  he  will  realize 
that  he  is  steadily  approaching  the  strand  of  a  per- 
fect love.  But  if  he  fails  to  accept  those  truths, 
his  religious  conduct  will  be  merely  a  struggle  to 
free  himself  from  spiritual  danger.  In  other 
words,  it  wiU  be  selfish,  and  will  have  no  other 
effect  than  to  sink  him  all  the  deejier  in  sin  and 
peril.  "  The  body  of  this  death,"  which  seemed  to 
Saul,  the  Jew,  too  heavy  to  be  kept  afloat  by  his 
most  strenuous  moral  exertions,  seemed  light 
enough  to  Paul,  the  Christian,  when  he  had  ex- 
changed his  selfish  legalism  for  trust  in  the  buoy- 
ant power  of  divine  grace.  The  seventh  chapter 
of  Romans  describes  the  splashings  and  flounder- 
ings  of  a  drowning  man  who  discovers,  at  the  last 
moment,  that  underneath  him  are  the  everlasting 
arms,  and  that  his  efforts  to  keep  his  head  above 


302    THE   RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

water  are  a  needless  waste  of  time  and  force. 
That  siofli  of  relief  which  follows  his  recital  of  his 
terrific  spiritual  struggles,  that  grateful  prayer,  "  I 
thank  God  through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord,"  is  the 
natural  utterance  of  exhausted  human  nature  when, 
after  painful  spiritual  experiences,  it  has  learned 
that  the  sole  object  to  be  gained  by  religious  effort 
is  not  self-preservation  but  moral  progress.  When 
the  same  truth  was  thundered  into  the  soul  of 
Martin  Luther,  when  his  bewildered  jienances  were 
ended  by  the  inward  voice  which  cried,  "  The  just 
shall  live  by  faith,"  a  moral  energy  was  set  free 
which  was  destined  to  do  more  for  the  ethical 
and  intellectual  growth  of  the  human  race  than 
any  force  which  has  come  into  operation  in  modern 
times. 

The  belief  which  will  enable  a  man  to  free  his 
moral  conduct  from  the  fatal  element  of  selfishness 
every  one  may  exercise.  It  is  an  act  of  the  v/ill 
in  no  wise  different  in  nature  from  the  volitions 
which  all  persons  without  exception  put  forth  every 
day  and  almost  every  hour  of  their  lives.  As  these 
do  not  rest  on  a  scientific  demonstration  of  their 
soundness,  but  arise  out  of  the  necessity  that  is 
laid  on  men  of  taking  for  granted  most  of  the  facts 
which  they  must  use  in  their  practical  affairs,  so 
the  faith  which  removes  from  one  the  fear  of  the 
law  need  not  be,  at  the  outset,  the  product  of  an 
unanswerable  train  of  reasoning.  As  explained 
in  the  first  chapter,  it  is  a  perfectly  rational  act  of 
the  mind,  if  it  is  only  an  assumption  cherished  as  a 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH  303 

means  of  ai^riving  at  experimental  certainty.  And 
faith  as  thus  conceived  it  is  comparatively  easy 
for  any  one  to  exercise  who  is  sincerely  desirous 
of  acquiring  such  a  righteousness  as  the  gospel 
approves. 

For,  in  the  first  place,  every  such  person  is 
psychologically  predisposed  to  put  confidence  in 
teachings  which  are  favorable  to  his  hopes.  We 
see  an  illustration  of  this  fact  in  the  analogous  case 
of  almost  any  invalid  who  has  been  given  up  by 
his  physician.  He  is  prepared  in  advance  to  credit 
encouraging  statements  as  to  his  prospect  of  get- 
ting well,  no  matter  who  may  make  them.  He  is 
ready  to  try  any  nostrum  which  any  one  may  recom- 
mend. He  will  eagerly  place  himself  in  the  hands 
of  quacks,  even,  who  make  to  him  the  absurdest 
promises.  Many  a  patent  medicine  owes  a  large 
part  of  its  sale,  and  many  a  medical  charlatan  a 
good  portion  of  his  practice,  to  this  universal  tend- 
ency on  the  part  of  sick  people  to  believe  repre- 
sentations which  flatter  their  hopes  of  being  cured. 
And  this  same  human  trait  paves  the  way  for  what 
is  theologically  known  as  "  saving  faith."  A  man 
who  feels  that  he  is  the  victim  of  a  desperate  moral 
disease  will  be  more  or  less  inclined  to  listen  favor- 
ably to  any  assurances  which  hold  out  to  him  a 
prospect  of  help.  No  man  can  undergo  the  spirit- 
ual experiences  which  are  described  in  the  seventh 
chapter  of  Romans  without  being  brought  by  them 
into  a  condition  in  which  it  will  be  relatively  easy 
for  him  to  credit  the  assertion  that  there  is  balm  in 


304    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

Gilead.  So  much  is  proved  by  the  readiness  with 
which  so  many  persons  resort  to  the  most  extrava- 
gant and  irrelevant  rehgious  rites  in  the  effort  to 
gain  inward  peace.  The  penances,  bloody  sacrifices, 
acts  of  cruel  self-torture  through  which  this  end  is 
sought  have  their  parallel  in  the  quack  nostrums 
by  the  aid  of  which  so  many  persons  try  to  regain 
their  health.  The  spiritual  and  the  physical  rem- 
edy alike  bear  witness  to  the  presence  in  human 
nature  of  a  predisposition  to  believe  in  whatever 
promises  to  meet  its  needs. 

But,  in  the  second  place,  belief  in  the  doctrine 
under  consideration  is  facilitated  by  certain  special 
considerations  which  have  already  been  adverted 
to  in  connection  with  the  Atonement.  It  is  the 
province  of  that  conspicuous  theological  tenet  to 
make  faith  easy  for  penitent  men.  The  assertion 
that  they  have  been  transferred  from  the  dominion 
of  law  to  that  of  grace  has  behind  it  the  sublime 
character  of  Jesus,  the  record  of  his  startling  works, 
the  prophetic  intimations  of  his  coming  which 
are  discoverable  in  the  utterances  of  Hebrew  and 
Gentile  seers,  the  story  of  the  church's  vast  moral 
conquests,  the  rehgious  experiences  of  innumer- 
able Christian  disciples.  Circumstances  have  been 
providentially  so  ordered  as  to  impress  upon  the 
heart  and  memory  of  man  and  to  stamp  indelibly 
on  the  history  of  the  human  race  the  imposing  fact 
that  justification  through  faith  has  been  promised 
in  the  name  of  God  by  a  Being  whose  origin,  pur- 
ity, majesty,  and  power  were  commensurate  with 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH  305 

the  grandeur  of  his  message,  and  has  been  reiter- 
ated by  an  apostle  whose  personal  sacrifices  for  his 
belief,  whose  heroic  life,  whose  intellectual  power, 
and  whose  claims  to  superhuman  enlightenment 
unite  to  render  him  the  grandest  character  which 
Christianity  has  as  yet  produced.  These  facts  and 
others  of  a  similar  nature  which  might  be  cited 
reduce  to  a  minimum  the  difficulties  which  sin  and 
remorse  are  apt  to  throw  in  the  way  of  Christian 
faith,  and  render  it  possible  for  any  one  who  is 
looking  for  spiritual  help  to  take  the  single  narrow 
step  which  will  suffice  to  bring  him  under  the 
control  of  unselfish  religious  motives.  And  if  we 
believe  that  only  some  extraordinary  act  of  divine 
providence  would  make  it  possible  for  most  men  to 
trust  an  assertion  that  they  are  not  under  the  law, 
we  have  encountered  one  more  knot  in  human  de- 
velopment and  still  another  antecedent  probability 
of  the  miracle. 

An  assurance  that  the  virtual  repeal  of  the  law 
will  not  be  abused  by  him  for  whom  it  has  taken 
place,  that  his  sense  of  safety  will  not  result  in  an 
indifference,  on  his  part,  to  morality  and  religion, 
is  found  in  the  fact  that  it  is  only  because  and 
while  faith  is  exercised  for  the  sake  of  righteous- 
ness that  it  transfers  any  one  from  the  dominion 
of  law  to  that  of  grace.  It  is  this  truth  which 
Paul  seems  to  have  in  mind  in  the  answers  that  he 
gives  to  his  own  questions :  "  Shall  we  continue 
in  sin,  that  grace  may  abound  ?  "  "  We  who  died 
to  sin,  how  shall  we  any  longer  live  therein  ?  " 


306    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

"Shall  we  sin,  because  we  are  not  under  law, 
but  under  grace?  "  "  God  forbid,"  is  Ms  reply. 
"Know  ye  not,  that  to  whom  ye  present  your- 
selves as  servants  unto  obedience,  his  servants  ye 
are  whom  ye  obey  ;  whether  of  sin  unto  death,  or 
of  obedience  unto  righteousness  ? "  It  is  thus 
taught  clearly  by  him  who  interpreted  the  gospel 
in  reference  to  the  practical  needs  of  the  Gentile 
world  that  no  man  can  get  the  benefits  of  this 
doctrine  which  is  so  prominently  associated  with 
his  name  who  is  not  honestly  committed  to  the 
service  of  Christ.  And  what  he  says  in  reference 
to  his  own  countrymen  is  also  in  point.  "  By 
their  unbelief  they  were  broken  off,  and  thou 
standest  by  thy  faith.  Be  not  highminded,  but 
fear."  Terror,  which  is  inappropriate  to  a  state 
of  grace,  may  well  be  felt  by  one  who  is  tempted 
to  fall  away  from  grace.  Faith  working  through 
love  is  the  steady  stream  of  oil  that  makes  smooth 
and  safe  the  waters  in  which  one  sails  ;  but  the 
threatening  waves  visible  at  intervals  just  beyond 
are  warning  him  that  it  must  not  cease  to  flow. 
Behef  in  Christ  is  substantially  inoperative  except 
in  so  far  as  it  stimulates  and  aids  one  to  acquire 
the  spirit  of  Christ. 

What  has  been  said  in  reference  to  the  unselfish 
nature  of  the  virtue  which  the  gospel  would  pro- 
mote through  the  agency  of  faith  is  not  nullified 
by  the  fact  that  Jesus  and  the  sacred  writers  make 
frequent  appeals  to  the  fear  of  punishment  and 
the  hope  of  reward.    The  real  and  deepest  psycho- 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH  307 

logical  effect  of  such  appeals  is  not  commonly  un- 
derstood. Much  that  has  been  said  against  fright- 
ening or  bribing  men  to  become  righteous  is  only 
half  true.  It  may  be  freely  conceded  that  a  virtue 
which  is  sustained  solely  by  the  hope  of  ultimate 
profit  is  not  worthy  of  the  name  from  the  point  of 
view  of  Christian  ethics,  whether  the  profit  is  to 
be  reaped  in  this  world  or  in  the  world  to  come. 
It  is  essentially  selfish,  and,  therefore,  is  of  the  kind 
which  the  gospel  aims  to  supplant.  It  need  not 
be  denied  that  a  Christian  who  has  no  other  rea- 
son for  the  hope  that  is  in  him  than  the  fear  that 
without  it  he  will  be  debarred  from  happiness  in 
the  next  life  is  only  nominally  a  follower  of  Chi'ist. 
He  is  really  under  the  law  stiU  and  not  under 
grace.  If  he  is  not  conscious  in  a  gradually  in- 
creasing measure  of  that  love  which  casteth  out 
fear,  he  has  no  evidence  that  the  spirit  of  Christ  is 
dwelling  in  him. 

But  while  so  much  may  be  admitted  to  be  true 
in  the  objections  that  are  urged  against  efforts  to 
bring  men  to  Christ  by  appeals  to  selfish  motives, 
there  is  another  and  very  important  side  to  the 
question.  It  is  a  psychological  fact  that  an  im- 
pending punishment  often  awakens  a  sense  of  guilt, 
and  that  a  proffered  reward  frequently  creates  a 
feeling  of  ill-desert.  Many  a  man  has  embezzled 
money  from  his  employer  for  years  without  losing 
any  sleep  on  account  of  an  uneasy  conscience,  but 
when  exposure  and  arrest  came,  the  full  magnitude 
of  his  wickedness  dawned  upon  him.    It  is  not  un- 


308    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

common  in  sucli  cases  for  the  criminal  to  loathe 
the  crime  more  than  he  dreads  the  punishment  of 
it ;  and  in  this  fact  lies  the  justification  of  appeals 
in  behalf  of  righteousness  to  the  fear  of  conse- 
quences. They  serve  to  direct  attention  to  the 
moral  defects  in  the  conduct  which  is  followed  by 
such  consequences. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  explain  the  underlying 
causes  of  the  phenomenon.  Whether  it  is  due  to 
a  natural  association  of  ideas  which  has  become 
instinctive  in  the  human  mind  through  an  experi- 
ence centuries  long  that  ill-desert  and  suffering  go 
hand  in  hand,  or  to  some  other  mental  law,  the 
fact  is  undeniable  and  may  be  easily  corroborated 
by  observation.  It  has  been  recognized  by  as  good 
a  psychologist  as  Shakespeare.  When  the  three 
noblemen  who  had  conspired  to  kill  King  Henry 
the  Fifth  are  arrested  just  in  time  to  nip  their 
enterprise  in  the  bud,  Scroop  says,  — 

"  Our  purposes  God  justly  hath  discover' d  ; 
And  I  repent  my  fault  more  than  my  death ; 
Which  I  beseech  your  highness  to  forgive, 
Although  my  body  pay  the  price  of  it." 

Cambridge  adds,  — 

"  But  God  be  thanked  for  prevention ; 
Which  I  in  sufferance  heartily  will  rejoice, 
Beseeching  God  and  you  to  pardon  me." 

And  Grey  concludes  :  — 

"  Never  did  faithful  subject  more  rejoice 
At  the  discovery  of  most  dangerous  treason 
Than  I  do  at  this  hour  joy  o'er  myself, 
Prevented  from  a  damned  enterprise  : 
My  fault,  but  not  my  body,  pardon,  sovereign." 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH  309 

When  the  sense  of  fear  has  awakened  remorse, 
the  man  has  been  brought  into  such  a  condition 
that  he  can  be  influenced  by  distinctively  Christian 
motives,  to  which  he  would  otherwise  have  proved 
insensible. 

The  effect  of  the  hope  of  reward  is  practically 
the  same.  The  first  real  and  abiding  sense  of  sin 
that  I  ever  experienced  was  aroused,  in  my  child- 
hood, by  a  sudden  appreciation  of  the  beauty  of 
heaven.  It  created  in  me  a  consciousness  that 
I  was  far  below  the  moral  level  of  such  a  place, 
and  an  earnest  determination  to  lift  myself  up  to 
it.  In  fact,  it  marked  a  turning-point  in  my  reli- 
gious history.  The  same  effect  seems  to  have  been 
produced  on  Peter  when  the  perfect  manhood  of 
his  Master  was  suddenly  illumined  by  the  light- 
ning flash  of  a  miracle,  and  he  fell  on  his  knees 
exclaiming,  "  Depart  from  me ;  for  I  am  a  sinful 
man,  O  Lord." 

A  ragged  street-boy  may  not  be  troubled  by  the 
condition  of  his  clothing  until  he  is  invited  to  some 
gathering  where  he  is  to  meet  only  well-dressed 
people  ;  then  he  will  suddenly  become  conscious  of 
his  dilapidated  appearance,  and  will  feel,  for  per- 
haps the  first  time  in  his  life,  a  desire  to  become 
clean  and  neat.  The  mental  operation  in  his  case 
is  precisely  the  same  as  that  described  in  the  last 
paragraph.  A  realization  of  his  unfitness  has  ren- 
dered the  desire  to  become  fit  his  ruling  motive. 

When  the  promises  of  the  gospel  have  awakened 
in  the  mind  of  any  man  a  hatred  of  sin  or  a  yearn- 


310    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

ing  for  holiness  which  has  taken  precedence  of 
them  as  a  motive  to  action,  they  have  made  it  pos- 
sible to  influence  his  conduct  by  higher  considera- 
tions than  those  of  personal  interest.  When  he 
has  fairly  begun  to  love  righteousness  for  its  own 
sake,  his  religion  is  no  longer  selfish,  even  though 
it  is  true  that  his  selfishness  first  gave  him  his  in- 
terest in  it.  If,  however,  the  lower  motives  which 
originally  led  him  to  call  himseK  a  Christian  do 
not  give  place  to  the  love  which  seeketh  not  its 
own  and  which  is  independent  of  the  expectation 
of  reward,  he  has  not  yet  entered  into  the  liberty 
which  is  in  Christ.  It  is  only  when  an  invitation 
to  the  feast  makes  the  guest  so  sensitive  to  his 
moral  raggedness  that  he  puts  on  the  wedding- 
garment  of  a  disinterested  righteousness  that  he 
has  any  right  or  permission  to  remain. 

The  need  of  eliminating  selfish  considerations 
from  the  practice  of  righteousness  is  one  that  is 
conmionly  recognized  by  those  who  are  striving  to 
reach  their  moral  ideals.  The  mad  woman,  in  the 
anecdote,  who  went  through  a  town  with  a  bucket 
of  water  in  one  hand  and  a  torch  in  the  other,  cry- 
ing that  she  was  about  to  extinguish  hell  and  burn 
up  heaven  in  order  that  men  might  practice  right- 
eousness for  its  own  sake,  had  method  in  her  mad- 
ness. Paul  had  the  same  purposes  in  view  when 
he  preached  the  doctrine  of  Justification  by  Faith. 
Jesus  sought  to  compass  the  same  ends  when  he 
said,  "He  that  liveth  and  believeth  in  me  shall 
never  die."     There  was  no  difference  between  the 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH  311 

two  in  what  they  taught  regarding  the  conditions 
of  salvation.  The  doctrine  we  are  considering  is 
not  to  be  got  rid  of  by  setting  Paul  aside  as  a 
marplot.  It  is  imbedded  in  the  very  heart  of 
Christianity,  which  owes  its  success  to  the  fact 
that  it  furnishes  penitent  men  with  reasons  for 
believing  that  God  has  accepted  them,  and  so 
enables  them  to  live  unselfish  and  holy  lives. 


CHAPTER  XII 

JUSTIFICATION    BY    FAITH    (PKACTICAL) 

The  doctrine  of  Justification  has  been  consid- 
ered, in  the  previous  chapter,  with  reference  to 
the  fact  that  faith  is  competent  to  remove  the  ob- 
stacle which  is  thrown  in  the  way  of  man's  moral 
development  by  the  tendency  of  sin  to  make  reli- 
gious action  selfish.  This  obstacle  was  shown  to 
be  mainly  of  a  psychological  nature,  originating, 
as  it  does,  in  the  strongest  of  the  natural  instincts, 
that  of  self-preservation.  But  there  is  another  of 
a  practical  quahty  which  grows  out  of  the  inherent 
difficulty  of  lifting  the  conduct  up  to  the  level  of 
our  ideals,  and  this  also  must  be  overcome  by  faith. 

If  the  only  ill  effect  produced  by  sin  on  the 
moral  nature  of  a  man  were  the  introduction  of 
selfish  motives  into  his  religious  conduct,  no  second 
branch  of  this  subject  would  have  to  be  treated ; 
but  there  are  other  ways  in  which  wrong-doing 
degrades  the  soul,  to  which  the  aspect  of  justifica- 
tion already  presented  bears  no  special  relation. 

In  the  first  place,  a  flaw  in  the  moral  character 
is  sure  to  spread,  for  the  psychological  reason  that 
a  man  wiU  usually  be  less  careful  to  preserve  from 
injury  that  which  has  been  already  harmed  than 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH  313 

he  is  to  keep  from  harm  that  which  is  as  yet  unin- 
jured. The  contrast  between  perfect  innocence 
and  the  smallest  degree  of  guilt  is  far  greater  than 
that  between  some  sinfulness  and  a  slight  increase 
of  it.  The  resistance  to  be  overcome,  therefore, 
in  committing  a  first  sin  is  immeasurably  greater 
than  will  be  opposed  to  the  temptation  to  sin  a 
second  time  ;  and  as  it  was  not  great  enough  to 
preserve  a  perfect  innocence,  it  will  be  too  small 
to  prevent  an  increase  of  wrong-doing.  Every- 
body has  had  proof  of  this  fact.  It  is  verified  by 
almost  daily  observation.  It  underlies  the  current 
warnings  against  the  first  glass,  against  the  first 
downward  step.  The  beginning  of  evil  has  often 
been  compared  to  the  first  drop  of  water  which 
finds  its  way  through  the  dike  ;  it  is  the  commence- 
ment of  a  slow  but  sure  process  of  disintegration. 

A  further  moral  degeneration  takes  place  be- 
cause the  consciousness  of  sin  creates  in  the  soul 
a  certain  animosity  against  the  deliverances  of  the 
conscience  which  imparts  a  darker  quality  to  the 
evil  committed.  It  is  a  matter  of  common  expe- 
rience that  men  are  apt  to  resent  attempts  that 
are  made  to  induce  them  to  perform  a  disagreea- 
ble duty.  Few  persons  will  welcome  criticisms  of 
their  moral  conduct  or  easily  resist  the  impulse 
to  hate  those  who  have  uttered  them.  Nor  is  the 
reason  far  to  seek.  These  criticisms  cause  pain. 
It  is  painful  to  be  reminded  of  a  moral  obligation 
which  one  is  unwilling  to  discharge.  It  is  ex- 
tremely uncomfortable  to  have  the  sense  of  duty 


314    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

come  in  collision  with  rooted  inclinations,  and  it  is 
but  a  natural  instinct  to  conceive  enmity  against 
that  which  occasions  the  discomfort.  Whether  it 
be  an  individual,  a  religion,  a  church,  or  a  moral 
law,  it  will  be  hated  for  the  unhappiness  it  has 
caused;  and  as  hatred  naturally  seeks  revenge, 
there  will  be  more  or  less  of  vindictiveness  in  the 
opposition  which  is  manifested  towards  the  dis- 
turbing influence. 

It  was  this  psychological  fact  apparently  that 
Paul  had  in  mind  when  he  spoke  of  the  law  en- 
tering that  sin  might  abound,  and  of  sin  through 
the  commandment  becoming  exceeding  sinful.  It 
may  shed  some  light,  also,  on  his  own  moral  condi- 
tion when  he  consented  to  the  death  of  Stephen, 
and  when,  changing  a  laudable  zeal  for  his  religion 
into  a  personal  animosity  against  those  who  had 
embraced  the  new  faith,  he  became  "  exceedingly 
mad  "  against  them.  We  have  here  the  natural 
workings  of  a  mind  that  has  caught  a  glimpse  of 
a  truth  which  cannot  be  accepted  without  an  act 
of  most  painful  self-sacrifice,  another  illustration  of 
the  profound  fact  which  Jesus  expressed  in  the 
words,  "  For  every  one  that  doeth  iU  hateth  the 
light,  and  cometh  not  to  the  light,  lest  his  works 
should  be  reproved,"  and  in  the  explanation  which 
he  gives  of  the  hostility  that  he  encountered  among 
his  own  countrymen  and  that  his  religion  was  to 
meet  with  among  the  Gentiles :  "  The  world  cannot 
hate  you ;  but  me  it  hateth,  because  I  testify  of  it, 
that  its  works  are  evil." 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH  315 

Once  more,  the  entrance  of  sin  into  the  soul 
is  apt  to  impart  a  certain  wildness  to  human  con- 
duct which  has  the  effect  of  hastening  moral  de- 
generation. There  would  seem  to  be  antecedently 
no  reason  why  men  should  be  worse  than  brutes. 
We  seldom  if  ever  detect  in  the  lower  animals  any 
tendency  to  act  unnaturally.  All  are  strictly 
moral  in  the  sense  that  they  are  obedient  to  the 
laws  of  their  own  nature.  But  man,  the  highest 
of  them  aU,  betrays  an  ingenuity  in  devising  sins, 
an  inordinate  desire  for  original  forms  of  wicked- 
ness, which  needs  to  be  accounted  for.  His  crimes 
are  often  so  inexplicable  in  the  light  of  any  temp- 
tations with  which  most  persons  are  familiar  that 
we  deem  them  almost  supernatural.  We  call 
them  demoniac,  and  see  in  them  a  certain  mystery 
of  iniquity.  They  may  perhaps  be  explained  as 
bewildered  efforts  of  the  soul  to  fill  up  a  conscious 
spiritual  void,  a  misdirected  application  of  an  en- 
ergy which  has  been  diverted  from  the  spiritual 
development  of  the  man. 

The  effect  of  aU  these  influences  combined  is 
to  render  the  reformation  of  human  nature  a  work 
of  appalling  difficulty.  No  one  can  seek  to  achieve 
the  character  which  the  gospel  commends  without 
soon  becoming  aware  that  the  spirit  of  Christian 
morality  is  utterly  opposed  to  the  natural  springs 
of  human  action.  To  try  to  live  for  others  is  to 
begin  to  learn  how  thorouglily  the  human  will  is 
dominated  by  selfish  motives.  It  is  a  formidable 
undertaking  to  make  over  a  man.    "  The  truth  is," 


316    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

says  Mr.  Mill,^  "that  there  is  hardly  a  single 
point  of  excellence  belonging  to  human  character 
which  is  not  decidedly  repugnant  to  the  untu- 
tored feehngs  of  human  nature."  The  ambition 
to  uproot  fixed  principles  of  action  is  apt  to  seem 
chimerical.  The  result  of  every  honest  effort  to 
build  a  life  on  the  foundation  of  love  to  God  and 
man  is  likely  to  be  a  discouraging  suspicion  that 
the  spirituality  of  Christ  is  too  spiritual  for  human 
imitation.  "  The  good  which  1  would  I  do  not: 
but  the  evil  which  I  would  not,  that  I  practice," 
describes  an  experience  which  is  familiar  to  every 
one  who  has  striven  to  free  himself  from  the  power 
of  evil  motives  ;  and  it  is  liable  to  have  disastrous 
consequences.  Perfect  manhood,  the  measure  of 
the  stature  of  the  fullness  of  Christ,  is  an  ideal 
which  may  shine  very  brightly  in  one's  moral  fir- 
mament, and  yet,  like  the  fixed  stars,  be  mainly 
suggestive  of  distance  and  inaccessibility.  When 
a  man  regards  absolute  holiness  as  beyond  his 
reach,  as  something  to  be  admired  sentimentally 
rather  than  achieved  heroically,  he  cannot  but  lose 
confidence  in  the  inerrancy  of  his  moral  sense. 
He  will  be  Hkely  to  form  the  same  opinion  of  any 
lower  type  of  virtue  which  cannot  be  attained  by 
any  ordinary  self-denial  and  determination.  Con- 
sequently his  moral  ambition  will  wane  as  stimulus 
is  thus  repeatedly  withdrawn  from  it,  and  will  re- 
present a  constantly  lowering  standard  of  moral 
obligation.     He  will  be  overawed  and  debased  by 

^  Three  Essays  on  Religion,  p.  46. 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH  317 

the  very  magnitude  of  the  moral  attainments  he 
has  been  exhorted  to  acquire. 

The  remedy  for  this  difficulty  is  identical  with 
that  which  often  makes  men  equal  to  seemingly 
impracticable  secular  undertakings,  namely,  energy, 
A  determined  and  persistent  purpose  is  an  indis- 
pensable prerequisite  to  great  worldly  success. 
The  obstacles  which  stand  between  any  man  and 
the  goal  of  his  ambition  yield  only  to  resolution  and 
force  of  will.  ''  Dash,"  "  pluck,"  and  "  push  "  are 
words  which  are  commonly  employed  to  indicate  the 
qualities  by  which  men  have  won  success  in  tem- 
poral pursuits.  It  would  be  but  natural  to  infer 
that  a  like  vigor  of  character  must  be  displayed  in 
accomplishing  high  spiritual  ends.  It  is  not  sur- 
prising, therefore,  that  the  Scriptures  represent 
salvation  as  conditioned  on  the  exercise  of  moral 
determination  and  force. 

Christ  has  affirmed  that  a  new  epoch  in  the  spir- 
itual history  of  the  human  race  began  with  the 
preaching  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  It  is  distin- 
guished from  that  which  preceded  it  by  a  peculiar 
tendency  to  develop  spiritual  enterprise  and  en- 
ergy. "  From  the  days  of  John  the  Baptist  until 
now  the  kingdom  of  heaven  suffereth  violence,  and 
men  of  violence  take  it  by  force,"  is  his  description 
of  the  conditions  of  spiritual  success.  The  incisive 
command,  "  Strive  to  enter  in  by  the  narrow 
door,"  suggesting  as  it  does  in  the  original  the  ac- 
tivity of  an  athlete  contending  for  a  prize,  gives 
the  keynote  of  the  new  teachings,  and  the  general 


318    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

tenor  of  the  New  Testament  is  in  harmony  with 
that  text.  The  traits  of  character  which  the  Chris- 
tian must  cultivate  are  illustrated  in  the  Gospels 
by  the  examples  of  an  importunate  borrower,  a 
pertinacious  plaintiff,  a  belligerent  king.  It  is 
indicated  in  the  parables  that  he  must  exercise  in 
the  pursuit  of  righteousness  something  analogous 
to  business  energy,  that  he  must  be  morally  a 
driving  man,  so  to  speak. 

The  kingdom  of  heaven  is  like  a  merchant  seek- 
ing goodly  pearls,  and  selling  everything  he  owns 
in  order  to  buy  one  of  great  value.  It  is  like  a 
treasure  which  the  finder  is  so  bent  on  having  that 
he  raises  money  enough  to  purchase  the  whole  field 
where  it  lies  hidden.  It  is  like  a  rock  which  a 
builder  was  so  determined  to  reach  that  he  digged 
in  the  earth  for  it  and  went  deep.  It  is  like  tal- 
ents which  were  doubled  by  vigorous  management, 
like  a  pound  with  which  a  man  traded  so  actively 
as  to  gain  ten  pounds.  And  in  the  Epistles  the 
Christian  is  exhorted  to  display  the  same  intensity 
of  purpose  and  action.  He  must  lay  aside  every 
weight  in  order  to  run  a  race  in  the  presence  of  a 
great  cloud  of  witnesses.  He  must  clothe  himseK 
in  complete  armor  in  order  to  engage  in  combat 
with  the  spiritual  hosts  of  wickedness  in  the  hea- 
venly places. 

The  gospel  lays  emphasis  on  the  fact  that  holi- 
ness is  a  legitimate  goal  of  human  ambition,  and 
that  it  can  be  attained  only  by  the  exercise  of  the 
same  enterprising  qualities  which  are  needful  for 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH  319 

success  in  secular  pursuits.  Human  industry  in 
almost  all  its  forms  is  noisy,  energetic,  almost 
fierce.  Looms  clash,  anvils  ring,  machinery  rum- 
bles. The  steam-hammer  falls  on  the  glowing 
shaft  with  a  blow  that  jars  the  earth.  The  loco- 
motive shrieks  and  thunders  in  the  hush  of  mid- 
night. Rocks  are  rent  by  gunpowder  with  an  ex- 
plosion that  hurls  boulders  into  the  clouds.  The 
kingdom  of  wealth  suffereth  violence,  and  the  ef- 
forts which  are  made  to  take  it  by  force  have  filled 
the  earth  with  bustle  and  uproar.  Now  Christ 
would  have  men  display  the  same  vigorous  qualities 
in  winning  spiritual  success.  He  would  have  them 
ambitious  to  build  up  pure  lives  as  well  as  to  rear 
imposing  warehouses.  He  would  have  them  zeal- 
ous in  weaving  divine  characters  as  well  as  in  mak- 
ing fabrics  of  cotton  or  silk.  If  it  is  worth  while 
to  pulverize  quartz  for  the  sake  of  gold,  it  is  no  less 
so  to  crush  temptation  for  the  sake  of  righteous- 
ness. If  it  is  profitable  to  generate  steam  in  order 
to  lift  coal  out  of  underground  galleries,  it  cannot 
be  less  so  to  develop  a  spiritual  force  which  wiU 
raise  the  soul  to  the  level  of  a  divine  ideal.  If  it 
is  enterprising  to  embark  a  fortune  in  a  commer- 
cial venture  in  the  hope  of  ultimate  returns,  it  is 
vastly  more  so  to  consecrate  a  life  to  a  supreme 
ethical  ambition  in  the  hope  of  winning  a  grander 
being  and  a  larger  usefulness  in  time  and  in  eter- 
nity. These  facts  illustrate  the  spirit  which  Christ 
would  introduce  into  the  moral  life  of  the  world. 
Now  when  that  progressive,  energetic  disposition 


320    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

which  has  just  been  described  is  manifested  in 
secular  undertakings,  its  mainspring,  the  source 
from  which  it  derives  its  force,  is  faith.  To  be- 
lieve that  a  thing  can  be  done  is  the  first  and  most 
important  step  in  the  process  of  doing  it.  The 
confidence  which  a  sagacious  man  reposes  in  his 
ability  to  succeed  in  a  difficult  undertaking  is  proof 
of  a  peculiar  force  of  will,  which  it  also  helps  after- 
wards to  sustain.  It  is  not,  however,  knowledge, 
or  a  conviction  wrought  by  overpowering  evidence. 
It  is  rather  an  exhibition  of  the  mind's  creative 
power,  of  its  innate  ability  to  transform  in  effect 
a  hope  into  a  certainty,  or,  in  other  words,  to  act 
as  if  what  is  desirable  were  known  to  be  attain- 
able. 

Conduct  which  is  grounded  in  knowledge  or  in 
an  involuntary  belief  does  not  adequately  reflect 
the  inherent  vigor  of  the  human  mind.  It  is  only 
when  the  will  not  merely  originates  acts,  but  also, 
in  a  certain  practical  sense,  chooses  the  opinions 
from  which  they  flow,  that  the  peculiar  force  which 
human  nature  is  capable  of  exerting  receives  a  fit- 
ting illustration.  That  indomitable  resolution  by 
which  a  man  believes  that  a  certain  end  is  within 
reach  chiefly  because  he  desires  to  reach  it,  and 
then  devotes  years  or  a  lifetime  to  the  work  of 
verifying  by  toil  and  self-denial  the  conviction  thus 
obtained,  evinces,  in  some  degree,  the  heroism 
which  exists  potentially  in  the  human  soul. 

The  emigrant  who  braves  the  dangers  and  hard- 
ships of  a  remote  wilderness  in  the  expectation  of 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH  321 

bettering  his  fortunes  and  the  statesman  who  risks 
reputation  and  popularity  in  the  attempt  to  carry- 
out  a  new  political  policy,  the  miner  who  has  exiled 
himself  from  home  in  the  precarious  search  for  min- 
eral treasures  and  the  speculator  who  spends  aU 
he  has  in  order  to  get  control  of  a  particular  stock, 
the  shipowner  who  exposes  his  fleet  to  the  storms 
and  perils  of  every  sea  and  the  military  commander 
who  hazards  a  decisive  engagement  on  the  strength 
of  information  which  may  turn  out  to  be  false,  aU 
derive  their  courage  and  resolution  from  their  faith, 
which  is  itself  a  result,  in  part  at  least,  of  a  bold 
choice.  They  run  the  risk  of  failure  and  loss  be- 
cause they  believe  that  they  will  succeed ;  and  this 
conviction  they  cherish,  not  because  they  know  it 
to  be  true,  but  because,  although  they  are  aware 
that  it  may  be  false,  they  choose  to  assume  that  it 
is  not  so.  The  confidence,  self-reliance,  and  enter- 
prise which  enable  a  man  to  make  his  mark  in 
politics  or  trade  are  largely  a  manifestation  of  his 
power  to  create  his  own  beliefs,  or  in  other  words  to 
decide  for  himseK,  in  cases  of  doubt,  in  what  pro- 
posed course  of  action  he  will  put  his  trust.  And 
the  tenacity  of  purpose  and  superiority  to  discour- 
agement which  he  afterwards  displays  are  due,  in 
great  measure,  to  the  stimulating  force  of  the  con- 
viction which  he  has  thus  voluntarily  acquired. 

In  making  faith,  therefore,  a  condition  of  spirit- 
ual success,  the  gospel  seeks  to  evoke  for  moral 
ends  the  latent  energy  of  human  nature.  The  be- 
lief which  the  Scriptures  enjoin  is  a  free  choice. 


322    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

As  explained  in  the  first  chapter,  it  is  not  an  act 
which  is  rendered  logically  necessary  by  complete 
religious  evidence.  Christianity  is  not  proved  at 
the  outset  in  the  sense  that  doubt  has  become  irra- 
tional. It  is  possible  for  even  a  candid  man  to 
withhold  belief  from  it  indefinitely,  if  he  inves- 
tigates it  simply  by  weighing  against  each  other 
the  arguments  on  both  sides  of  the  question,  while 
he  neglects  to  avail  himself  of  the  broad  induc- 
tion which  can  be  derived  from  personal  experi- 
ence. No  man  can  have  the  faith  which  Christ 
enjoins  who  will  adopt  no  theological  opinions  until 
they  have  been  demonstrated  beyond  aU  possibility 
of  error  to  be  sound. 

A  person  becomes  a  Christian  through  the  agency 
of  a  volition.  He  is  attracted  by  the  beauty  of 
holiness,  and  in  order  to  acquire  it  he  resolves  to 
put  his  trust  in  certain  religious  teachings  which 
he  cannot  as  yet  prove  to  be  true.  Or,  what  is 
almost  the  same  thing,  he  is  repelled  by  the  ugli- 
ness of  sin,  and  determines  to  credit  a  religion  which 
claims  to  have  the  power  to  rid  him  of  it.  He 
adopts  as  his  ideal  of  righteousness  the  perfect 
virtue  which  is  exemplified  in  Christ,  and  chooses 
to  regard  it  as  attainable.  He  then  sets  to  work 
to  acquire  it.  In  other  words,  he  exercises  for  an 
unselfish  object  the  same  mental  vigor  which  is 
displayed  by  all  successful  men  in  their  secular 
enterprises.  He  who  would  enter  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  must  have,  to  some  extent,  that  force  of  wiU 
which  enables  one  to  act  with  decision  in  spite  of 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH  323 

uncertainty  and  doubt.  He  must  possess  that  reso- 
lute bent  of  mind  which  will  make  it  possible  for 
him  to  choose  the  beliefs  on  which  he  purposes  to  act 
even  when  his  understanding  can  only  halt  between 
two  opinions.  He  must  be  able,  like  the  father  of 
the  demoniac  child,  to  lift  himself  by  the  summary 
exercise  of  his  voluntary  power  above  mere  intel- 
lectual difficulties,  and  with  the  words,  "  I  believe," 
adopt  a  principle  of  action  even  while  his  cautious 
reason  may  be  able  only  to  utter  the  prayer,  "  Help 
thou  mine  unbelief."  The  only  difference  there  is 
between  the  faith  which  all  men  exercise  in  the 
pursuit  of  temporal  ends  and  the  faith  which  saves 
the  soul  is  in  the  objects  for  which  they  are  cher- 
ished. A  belief  in  the  possibility  of  obtaining  what 
seems  a  desirable  end  is  called  enterprise  when  it 
is  indulged  for  the  sake  of  earthly  prizes,  and  sav- 
ing faith  when  it  is  exhibited  in  the  pursuit  of 
righteousness.  Faith  in  Christ  is  sluggish  human 
nature  rousing  itself  to  meet  the  exigencies  of  its 
moral  condition.  It  is  selfish  humanity  putting 
forth  its  latent  strength  to  recover  the  lost  image 
of  God.  It  justifies  simply,  as  the  etymology  of 
the  word  suggests,  because  it  makes  just,  because 
it  expresses  and  fosters  an  energy  of  purpose  which 
will  make  its  way  through  the  temptations  and 
discouragements  with  which  the  path  of  holiness  is 
beset. 

Hence,  Christ  rewarded  faith  even  when  it  was 
devoid  of  ethical  quality,  when  it  was  exercised 
for  personal  advantage  only,  and  his  reason  for  so 


324    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

doing  may  be  gathered  from  the  facts  above  pre- 
sented. He  thus  gave  a  public,  practical,  and  em- 
phatic indorsement  to  a  power  of  the  human  mind 
which  would  need,  in  order  to  become  spiritually 
useful,  only  to  be  applied  to  the  pursuit  of  holiness. 
The  woman  of  Canaan,  the  blind  man  by  the  way- 
side, the  nobleman  whose  son  was  healed  at  Caper- 
naum, exercised  their  great  faith  to  obtain  their 
own  private  ends.  The  despondent  father  whose 
voluntary  belief  was  recompensed  in  spite  of  his 
intellectual  unbelief  gave  no  evidence  of  having 
been  converted  to  Christianity.  Faith  saves  spir- 
itually only  when  exercised  for  spiritual  purposes, 
and  in  none  of  the  cases  just  referred  to  did  it  pos- 
sess apparently  any  quality  different  from  or  mor- 
ally superior  to  the  resolute  confidence  with  which 
an  invalid  adopts  a  novel  course  of  medical  treat- 
ment, or  which  a  parent  displays  when,  at  a  great 
pecuniary  sacrifice,  he  sends  an  ailing  child  to  some 
mineral  spring  or  to  a  more  invigorating  climate. 

Therefore,  although  Jesus  uniformly  required 
belief  in  his  power  to  heal  before  exerting  it,  he 
did  not  necessarily  improve  men  morally  by  so 
doing.  One  might  have  faith  enough  to  recover 
his  eyesight  and  yet  not  become  a  Christian.  Of 
ten  lepers  cleansed  at  one  time,  nine  had  enough 
to  regain  their  health  without,  apparently,  being 
brought  any  nearer  to  God.  The  marvelous  cures 
wrought  by  Christ  were  not  a  primary  or  perma- 
nent feature  of  his  mission,  but  seem  rather  to 
have  been  intended  for  sensible  illustrations  of  the 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH  325 

conditions  on  which  its  benefits  might  be  received. 
By  healing  the  sick  in  recognition  of  their  faith 
he  called  attention  to  the  dormant  power  there  is 
in  human  nature  to  overcome  the  depressing  influ- 
ence of  doubt,  and  at  the  same  time  exemplified 
its  efficacy.  Almost  every  cure  wrought  by  him 
emphasized  the  fact  that  men  may,  if  they  will,  put 
forth  energy  enough  to  beheve  that  what  they  de- 
sire to  have  they  can  obtain  ;  and  he  would  merely 
have  them  use  this  latent  power  of  will  in  sur- 
mounting all  discouragements  which  might  hinder 
them  from  embarking  in  pursuit  of  holiness. 

Hence,  in  a  community  where  unbelief  was  gen- 
eral and  unconquerable  he  performed  few  mighty 
works,  not,  as  I  apprehend,  because  his  power  had 
there  departed  from  him,  but  because  he  could  not 
there  illustrate  by  means  of  it  the  spiritual  lesson 
which  he  was  seeking  to  enforce.  He  could  not 
furnish  examples  of  the  efficacy  of  faith  where 
no  faith  existed.  His  miracles  of  healing  taught 
most  impressively  the  general  truth  that  all  things 
are  possible  to  him  that  believeth  ;  but  only  they 
reaped  the  full  benefit  of  their  ability  to  believe 
who  employed  it  to  obtain  the  one  thing  needful, 
deliverance  from  the  bondage  of  sin. 

So,  too,  his  miracles  as  a  whole  favor  the  surmise 
that  they  were  mainly  object-lessons,  analogies 
which  would  facilitate  the  uplifting  of  human 
thought  to  spiritual  facts.  How  readily  his  various 
cures  lend  themselves  to  this  interpretation  of  their 
meaning  is   seen  in  the  naturalness  with  which 


326    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

spiritual  infirmities  find  expression  in  language 
borrowed  from  physical  ailments.  "  One  thing  I 
know,  that  whereas  I  was  blind  I  now  see,"  was 
originally  the  utterance  of  one  who  had  recovered 
his  eyesight,  but  it  has  been  appropriated  to  de- 
scribe the  experience  of  those  who  have  come  to 
recognize  the  truth  which  is  in  Christ.  The  deaf, 
the  dumb,  the  lame,  easily  suggest  religious  paral- 
lels, and  seem  to  have  furnished  them  to  the  He- 
brew prophets.  Leprosy  was  a  disease  which  sym- 
bolized sin  to  the  Jewish  mind  as  no  other  did ;  it 
was  viewed  with  peculiar  horror  on  that  account ; 
and  it  would  have  been  impossible  for  Jesus  to 
give  a  more  forcible  and  vivid  illustration  of  his 
power  to  save  men  from  sin  than  he  would  fur- 
nish by  curing  tliis  terrible  malady.  The  raising 
of  Lazarus  he  himseK  interprets  as  a  token  of  his 
abihty  to  quicken  the  morally  dead,  as  is  shown  by 
his  remark,  "  He  that  believeth  in  me,  though  he 
were  dead,  yet  shall  he  live:  and  whosoever  liveth, 
and  believeth  in  me,  shall  never  die."  When  the 
blind  man  was  brought  to  him  on  the  road  to  Jer- 
icho, the  question  which  Jesus  put  to  him,  "  What 
wilt  thou  that  I  should  do  unto  thee  ? "  would 
seem  to  have  been  a  needless  one  unless  it  was 
designed  to  suggest  to  the  man  that  the  great 
Physician  could  cure  other  than  physical  blindness. 
So  when  the  paralytic  was  lowered  from  the  house- 
top, it  was  a  moral  cure  which  Jesus  wrought 
first,  as  appears  from  his  words,  "  Thy  sins  be  for- 
given  thee."     And  when  his  right   to  use  those 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH  327 

words  was  virtually  denied  by  some  who  were  pre- 
sent he  replied,  "  That  ye  may  know  that  the 
Son  of  man  hath  power  on  earth  to  forgive  sins 
(he  saith  to  the  sick  of  the  palsy),  .  .  .  Arise,  and 
take  up  thy  bed  and  go  unto  thy  house,"  —  as  if 
there  was  so  close  an  analogy  between  the  physi- 
cal and  the  spiritual  cure  that  the  power  to  per- 
form the  one  could  be  inferred  from  the  power  to 
work  the  other. 

And  so  of  every  other  wonderful  work  ascribed 
to  him.  It  fits  in  so  readily  with  a  spiritual  in- 
terpretation of  it  that  in  every,  or  almost  every, 
case  the  miracle  has  supplied  the  language  in 
which  certain  experiences  of  the  church  or  of  in- 
dividual Christians  are  most  naturally  described. 
Who  can  fail  to  see  that  the  remarkable  draught 
of  fishes  that  brought  Peter  to  his  knees  was  in- 
tended as  a  symbol  of  the  successes  which  awaited 
him  and  others  as  fishers  of  men  ?  How  often 
has  the  stilling  of  the  tempest  been  used  to  enforce 
the  truth  that  Christianity  is  safe  even  when  the 
Master  seems  oblivious  of  the  perils  which  surround 
it  !  Can  any  one  doubt  that  the  chief  significance 
of  the  feeding  of  the  multitudes,  especially  when 
considered  in  connection  with  the  discourse  on 
the  Bread  of  Life  which  is  associated  with  it,  is 
in  the  apt  and  much  needed  illustration  it  affords 
of  the  adequacy  of  even  the  small  resources  of 
Christ's  followers  to  supply  the  religious  needs  of 
the  world  when  these  resources  have  been  conse- 
crated by  the  blessing  of  the  Saviour  ?     Could  a 


328    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

more  impressive  emphasis  than  is  furnished  by  the 
narrative  which  describes  his  appearance  on  the 
sea  to  the  disciples  in  their  storm-tossed  boat  be 
given  to  the  fact,  which  the  church  so  gladly  be- 
lieves, that  when  it  has  become  weary  and  helpless 
in  the  path  of  duty  it  may  confidently  expect  his 
presence  and  aid?  Nor  will  any  one  who  has 
been  sustained  through  a  troubled  and  stormy  life 
by  his  Christian  faith  have  any  difficulty  in  re- 
cognizing his  experiences  in  those  of  Peter  when 
he  left  his  boat  to  walk  upon  the  waves,  or  in 
understanding  that  the  whole  course  of  his  religious 
development  has  been  so  ordered  as  to  impress 
upon  his  mind  the  fact  that  even  the  fluctuations 
of  trial  and  danger  afford  a  safe  footing  to  him 
who  would  draw  near  to  Christ. 

Those  who  imagine  that  the  miracles  were 
meant  to  be  permanent  features  of  the  Christian 
religion,  that  they  may  be  expected  to  recur  even 
in  our  own  time  as  a  sequel  to  a  sufficient  degree 
of  faith,  and  that  it  is  only  the  weakness  of  hu- 
man belief  which  keeps  them  from  becoming  inci- 
dents of  daily  or  hourly  occurrence,  seem  to  have 
missed  their  real  import.  They  were  not  designed 
to  illustrate  the  power  of  a  great  faith,  but  that 
which  inheres  in  the  principle  of  faith,  even  in 
faith  which  is  no  larger  than  a  grain  of  mustard- 
seed.  They  were  not  wrought  to  supersede  the 
common  laws  of  nature  or  to  render  men  independ- 
ent of  the  usual  methods  of  gaining  health  and 
other  desirable  ends.     They  are  essentially  parables 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH  329 

narrated  by  signs  instead  of  words.  The  parable, 
in  tbe  common  acceptation  of  the  term,  is  a  story 
that  illustrates  a  spiritual  law  or  fact  which  might 
be  apprehended  without  it ;  the  miracle  is  an 
event  which  illustrates  a  spiritual  law  or  fact  that 
transcends  human  powers  of  observation.  A  man 
needs  only  to  hear  the  story  of  the  Prodigal  Son 
in  order  to  form  some  true  idea  of  God's  attitude 
towards  the  penitent  sinner  ;  but  he  needs  to  know 
that  a  multitude  has  been  fed  by  Christ  with  a 
few  loaves  and  fishes  in  order  to  believe  that  the 
blessing  of  God  can  render  the  simple  truths  of 
the  gospel  the  ultimate  food  of  all  mankind.  The 
miracle  becomes  an  aid  to  religious  faith  by  direct- 
ing the  attention,  through  a  sublime  analogy,  to 
recondite  but  momentous  facts  in  the  invisible 
world.  It  fulfilled  its  mission  when  it  was  per- 
formed and  went  on  record.  The  truth  which  it 
was  designed  to  teach  has  thus  been  added  perma- 
nently to  the  didactics  of  Christianity.  A  repeti- 
tion of  the  sign  itself,  therefore,  is  needless  and  is 
not  to  be  expected. 

The  teachings  of  the  Old  Testament  as  to  the 
import  of  faith  are  in  harmony  with  those  of  the 
New.  The  faith  of  Abraham  was  praised  even 
when,  as  would  appear,  it  was  not  exercised  for 
a  spiritual  end.  When  he  accepted  the  divine 
assurance  that  his  seed  would  outnumber  the  stars 
in  multitude,  his  faith  had  no  obvious  ethical 
quality.  It  seems  to  have  been  evoked  by  the 
influence  of  personal  ambition,  by  the  stimulating 


330    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

prospect  of  becoming  the  founder  of  a  mighty- 
nation.  Neither  is  it  called,  in  the  Book  of  Gene- 
sis, a  righteous  act.  It  is  said  merely  to  have 
been  counted  to  him  for  righteousness.  That  is, 
apparently,  there  was  a  promise  of  righteousness 
in  it  because  the  force  of  will  exhibited  in  it  was 
competent,  when  employed  in  the  right  direction, 
to  elevate  and  sanctify  his  character.  He  is  to  be 
understood,  no  doubt,  as  already  actuated  by  a 
sincere  desire  for  righteousness.  This  single  act 
of  faith,  therefore,  evinced  on  his  part  a  contempt 
of  difficulties,  a  superiority  to  discouragements, 
which  was  sure  to  show  itself  in  his  moral  conduct 
and  to  make  him  in  time  an  eminently  holy  man. 
And  when  we  read  that  saying  of  Christ,  "  Your 
father  Abraham  rejoiced  to  see  my  day ;  and  he 
saw  it,  and  was  glad,"  we  may  surmise  that  Jesus 
meant  to  teach  that  the  same  sanguine,  energetic 
temperament  which  had  made  it  possible  for  the 
father  of  the  faithful  to  put  his  trust  in  a  seem- 
ingly incredible  promise  enabled  him  to  anticipate 
the  mission  of  Jesus  and  to  obtain  from  it  the 
moral  stimulus  which  won  for  him  the  proud  title 
of  "  the  friend  of  God." 

If,  however,  it  should  be  thought  that  some  of 
the  expressions  used  by  Paul  are  inconsistent  with 
this  view  and  constrain  us  to  adopt  the  common 
opinion  that  the  faith  of  Abraham  was  a  righteous 
act  in  itself  and  was  reckoned  to  him  as  perfect 
righteousness,  or  a  righteous  character,  this  inter- 
pretation will  stiU  be  in  harmony  with  what  has 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH  331 

been  presented ;  for  there  would  seem  to  be  no 
reason  why  a  single  righteous  act  of  belief  should 
have  been  counted  to  any  one  for  a  faultless  moral 
character  unless  it  manifested  a  moral  force  which 
was  competent  to  develop  it  into  that  for  which  it 
had  been  imputed. 

Justification  by  faith,  then,  is  not  an  arbitrary 
divine  act.  It  is  not  one  that  is  wrought  without 
any  obvious  regard  to  the  inherent  fitness  of  things. 
It  is  not  even  one  which,  to  any  considerable  de- 
gree, is  shrouded  in  mystery.  God  justifies  no 
one  who  is  not  certain  to  become  just.  He  im- 
putes no  virtue  which  is  not  sure  to  be  acquired. 
Belief  is  reckoned  to  one  for  righteousness  simply 
because  it  will  make  one  righteous.  Faith  in 
Christ  saves  the  soul,  first,  because  it  does  away 
with  the  debilitating  fear  which  makes  religious 
action  selfish,  and,  secondly,  because  it  evinces  and 
helps  to  foster  an  energy  which  is  destined  in 
time  to  annihilate  sin. 

It  is  a  failure  to  understand  the  inseparable 
connection  between  belief  and  conduct  which  has 
given  rise  to  the  misconception  that  there  is  a 
disagreement  between  Paul  and  James  as  to  the 
fundamental  conditions  of  salvation.  The  state- 
ment of  the  one,  "  A  man  is  justified  by  faith 
apart  from  the  works  of  the  law,"  and  that  of  the 
other,  "Ye  see  that  by  works  a  man  is  justified, 
and  not  only  by  faith,"  have  been  often  charged 
with  being  irreconcilable  with  each  other.  They  are 
no  more  so,  however,  than  are  the  contrasted  views 


332    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

of  Ckristianity  whicli  are  found  in  the  utterances 
of  Chi'ist  and  which  have  been  given  in  an  earlier 
chapter.  They  are  no  more  self -contradictory  than 
are  the  ethics  and  the  doctrinal  teachings  of  Paul 
himself.  James's  declarations  of  the  futility  of  a 
barren  faith  fall  far  below  those  of  the  great  apos- 
tle to  the  Gentiles  in  the  thirteenth  chapter  of 
First  Corinthians,  where  he  virtually  asserts  that 
a  man  is  justified  neither  by  faith  nor  by  works, 
but  by  love. 

In  point  of  fact,  both  are  right  and  equally  so. 
The  difference  between  them  is  mainly  that  one  is 
putting  emphasis  on  the  first  of  the  essentials  of  a 
Christian  character,  while  the  other  lays  stress  on 
the  second.  Paul,  analytical,  profound,  psycho- 
logical, mentally  abstracts  faith  from  the  works 
which  are  really  inseparable  from  it,  and  asserts 
the  undoubted  fact  that  in  it  resides  the  force 
which  makes  the  latter  possible.  James,  practical, 
plain,  familiar,  fixes  his  attention  on  the  ethical 
conduct  in  which  faith  results,  and  affirms  that  this, 
as  the  thing  of  obvious  value,  has  a  share  in  the 
process  of  making  men  righteous.  Paul  maintains 
that  to  the  planted  seed  must  be  accorded  the 
honor  of  producing  the  fruit  rather  than  to  the 
tree  which  but  for  the  seed  would  not  have  existed. 
James  declares  that  it  is  the  tree  that  bears  the 
fruit  and  not  the  seed  only,  which,  unless  it  sprouts 
and  makes  a  tree,  is  barren  and  dead.  They  are 
simply  looking  at  the  subject  from  different  points 
of  view.    Both  imply  or  admit  that  a  perfect  life  is 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH  333 

perfect  salvation.  Neither  would  deny,  and  Paul 
strenuously  contends,  that  such  a  hfe  is  impossible 
save  as  a  gradual  growth  out  of  a  germ  of  faith. 
When  the  latter  condenses  the  whole  of  his  reli- 
gious philosophy  into  a  single  formula,  the  alleged 
disagreement  vanishes.  "  For  in  Christ  Jesus 
neither  circumcision  availeth  anything,  nor  uncir- 
cumcision,  but  faith  working  through  love,"  is  a 
view  of  justification  which  tallies  exactly  with  that 
of  James. 

No  new  principle  of  action,  then,  is  introduced 
into  the  world  by  this  doctrine.  On  the  contrary, 
the  wild  suggestions  of  spiritual  quackery  and  an 
unreasoning  mysticism  are  set  aside  by  it.  The 
unity  of  God  receives  a  fresh  illustration  from  it 
through  the  added  evidence  it  gives  that  the  con- 
ditions of  success  are  uniform  in  all  branches  of 
human  activity.  If  faith  is  needful  for  redemp- 
tion from  sin  and  death,  it  is  none  the  less  so  for 
salvation  from  poverty  and  obscurity.  If  men 
need  encouragement  and  support  before  they  can 
believe  in  themselves  and  in  the  possibility  of  win- 
ning a  fortune  or  a  name,  the  promises  of  the  gos- 
pel recognize  the  fact  in  its  relation  to  eternal 
prizes,  and  reveal  the  truths  which  are  calculated 
to  inspire  hope  and  confidence.  The  parable  of 
the  Unfaitliful  Steward  sets  forth  its  own  moral 
in  the  text,  "  The  sons  of  this  world  are  for  their 
own  generation  wiser  than  the  sons  of  the  light." 
In  other  words,  men  will  display  when  they  are 
seeking  a  selfish  advantage  a  shrewdness,  an  enter- 


334    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

prise,  a  wisdom  in  suiting  means  to  ends  which 
they  seem  to  regard  as  unnecessary  when  only 
spiritual  gains  are  to  be  had.  The  doctrine  of 
Justification  by  Faith  simply  translates  the  con- 
ditions of  temporal  success  into  the  language  of 
spiritual  achievement.  The  sons  of  the  light  must 
be  as  wise  for  their  own  generation  as  the  sons 
of  this  world  if  they  are  to  reap  in  eternity  the 
success  which  the  others  so  often  win  in  time. 

Human  society  has  found  it  advisable  to  em- 
body the  principle  of  this  doctrine  in  its  statutes. 
The  supersession  of  imprisonment  for  debt  by 
bankrupt  laws,  which  relieve  the  debtor  of  all  dis- 
couragement on  account  of  debts  which  he  cannot 
pay  and  permit  him  to  begin  business  anew,  is  akin 
to  one  feature  of  justification  by  faith.  "  The  re- 
mission of  sins  that  are  past  "  is  indispensable  if 
men  are  to  try  to  abstain  from  sin  in  the  future. 
There  must  be  no  old  accounts  of  which  an  im- 
possible settlement  is  likely  to  be  demanded  by 
and  by,  no  pitiless  arm  reaching  up  out  of  the 
abyss  of  time  to  pluck  down  an  aspiring  soul  from 
the  very  pinnacles  of  hope.  In  real  life  Jean  Val- 
jean  will  never  become  a  saint  while  Javert  is  dog- 
ging his  heels.  No;  heaven  also  must  have  its 
bankrupt  laws  if  remorse  is  to  eventuate  in  a  new 
life.  The  threats  which  are  ordinarily  inseparable 
from  sin  must  be  deprived  of  their  terror  if  it  is  to 
become  psychologically  possible  for  one  who  feels 
that  he  has  incurred  them  to  achieve  a  divine 
character. 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH  335 

And  the  incentives  to  action  which  society 
brings  to  bear  upon  the  man  it  is  seeking  to  re- 
form are  in  line  with  those  which  the  gospel  sug- 
gests to  all  whom  it  is  trying  to  justify.  To 
impress  upon  a  fallen  man  a  conception  of  the 
essential  dignity  of  manhood,  to  persuade  him  that 
he  is  an  object  of  friendly  interest  to  those  who 
are  far  above  him  in  personal  character  and  social 
station,  to  assure  him  that  future  failures  will  not 
exhaust  the  patience  of  his  benefactors,  to  promise 
him  constant  sympathy  and  help,  to  give  him  hope 
that  he  will  achieve  success  in  the  end,  is  likely, 
if  anything  is,  to  arouse  his  dormant  moral  energy 
and  make  him  equal  to  the  work  for  which  he  has 
girded  himself.  All  of  these  motives  the  philan- 
thropist presents  to  the  outcast  whom  he  is  seeking 
to  save,  and  all  of  them  are  brought  to  bear  on 
him  whom  Christ  is  justifying.  The  declarations 
that  he  is  a  son  of  a  heavenly  Father,  that  there 
is  joy  over  his  conversion  among  the  angels  of 
heaven,  that  the  way  is  always  open  for  the  return- 
ing prodigal,  that  there  is  an  ever  present  Spirit 
who  will  help  his  infirmities,  and  that  in  due  sea- 
son he  will  reap  if  he  faints  not,  are  cognate  with 
those  enumerated  above.  They  help  to  keep  faith 
alive  in  spite  of  failures,  and  so  to  bring  the  life 
gradually  up  to  its  ideals. 


CHAPTER  XIII 

LOVE    AND    SERVICE 

The  love  wliich  Christianity  inculcates  and  in 
which  is  found  its  reason  for  being  is  not  only 
disinterested,  but  it  is  also  comprehensive  and 
universal.  It  seeks  to  bless  wherever  it  can  find 
anything  to  bless.  Its  nature  is  to  promote  as  far 
as  possible  the  happiness  of  all  sentient  beings, 
to  manifest  itseK  in  beneficent  action  towards  aU 
living  objects.  The  ways  in  which  it  will  express 
itseK  will  differ  according  to  the  needs  and  charac- 
ter of  that  which  caUs  it  forth,  and  its  intensity 
will  normally  be  proportioned  to  the  value  of  that 
which  is  loved,  but  nevertheless  in  the  last  analy- 
sis it  is  a  single  principle.  It  is  a  disposition  to 
render  affectionate  service  to  all  forms  of  fife  ac- 
cording to  their  capacity  to  receive  it.  Whether 
it  is  cherished  towards  a  worm,  a  man,  or  God,  it  is 
intrinsically  the  same  thing.  Its  names  and  offices 
wiU  be  as  various  as  are  the  classes  of  objects  by 
which  it  is  evoked.  It  will  be  called  piety  when 
exercised  towards  the  Deity  and  humanity  when 
displayed  towards  the  lower  animals.  When  di- 
rected towards  human  beings,  it  will  be  known  by 
as  many  different  appellations  as  there  are  dis- 


LOVE  AND  SERVICE  337 

tinct  relations  in  which  it  shows  itself.  It  will 
be  denominated,  according  to  circumstances,  jus- 
tice, morality,  virtue,  righteousness,  holiness.  But 
these  names  indicate  only  so  many  different  ways 
in  which  it  finds  appropriate  expression.  Justice 
is  love  giving  to  others  their  rights  ;  morality  is 
love  discharging,  in  the  matter  of  private  conduct, 
its  obligations  to  society  ;  holiness  is  love  imitating 
the  divine  character.  All  of  these  names  are  often 
given  to  conduct  and  qualities  which  have  no  love 
in  them,  but  they  denote  Christian  virtues  only 
when  they  designate  respe  jtively  some  phase  of  an 
absolute  benevolence,  of  an  active  good-will  felt 
towards  every  sentient  being. 

On  whatever  plane  this  love  may  first  show  it- 
seK,  it  is  sure  to  extend  to  every  other  which  may 
be  brought  to  its  knowledge.  Whoever  loves  man 
in  the  Christian  sense  will  love  God  also,  and  true 
piety  necessarily  involves  the  principle  of  philan- 
thropy. "  He  that  loveth  not  his  brother  whom 
he  hath  seen,  cannot  love  God  whom  he  hath  not 
seen,"  says  John.  In  other  words,  love  can  make 
no  exceptions.  It  cannot  discriminate  among  its 
objects  to  the  prejudice  of  any.  It  is  an  indivisi- 
ble principle  of  action,  and  needs  not  even  to  see 
that  on  which  it  is  lavished.  It  may  be  mani- 
fested towards  an  invisible  being.  But  if  it  is 
not  elicited  by  that  which  is  seen,  there  is  no  gen- 
uineness in  it  when  it  is  supposed  to  be  exercised 
towards  that  which  is  not  seen.  It  would  be  en- 
tirely pertinent  to  demand.  If  a  man  love  not  his 


338    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

brother  whom  he  hath  not  seen,  how  can  he  love 
his  brother  whom  he  hath  seen  ?  In  the  Christian 
sense  he  cannot.  Fraternal  love,  according  to  the 
gospel,  is  not  an  emotion  which  depends  on  the  in- 
fluence of  certain  visible  attractions  ;  it  is  a  men- 
tal attitude  which  is  assumed  towards  anything  vis- 
ible or  invisible,  near  or  remote,  which  is  entitled  to 
the  name  of  brother.  Paul  only  displayed  his  cus- 
tomary psychological  precision  when  he  said,  "  He 
that  loveth  another  [Gr.  "the  other; "  Rev.  Vers. 
"  his  neighbor  "]  hath  fulfilled  the  law."  There 
was  more  in  the  text  of  the  law  than  the  mere 
command  to  love  one's  neighbor ;  but  a  real  obe- 
dience to  that  presupposes  a  moral  condition  to 
which  any  violation  of  the  law  whatever  would 
be  foreign.  No  man  is  really  honest,  even  though 
he  scrupulously  pays  a  certain  class  of  his  debts, 
if,  with  the  ability  to  pay  them  all,  he  refuses  to 
do  so.  If  he  is  reaUy  honest  in  paying  a  single 
creditor,  that  fact  guarantees  the  payment  of  every 
other  as  soon  as  he  has  the  means.  It  is  proof  of 
a  disposition,  of  one  which  cannot  defraud  any  man 
without  being  at  discord  with  itself.  So  love  is  not 
genuine,  in  the  Christian  meaning  of  the  word,  if 
it  evinces  a  needless  partiality.  They  in  whom  it 
exists  as  a  principle  may  be  frequently  seduced  by 
temptation  into  action  which  is  opposed  to  it.  It 
will  be  slow  in  gaining  full  control  of  the  conduct. 
But  these  inconsistencies  will  be  recognized  as 
such  by  him  who  has  committed  them  and  will  not 
be  justified  by  him.  Love  as  a  purpose  must  be  true 


LOVE  AND   SERVICE  339 

to  itself.  If  it  is  genuine  in  a  single  instance  it 
wiU  manifest  itself  as  a  universal  principle. 

When  a  certain  lawyer  put  to  Jesus  tlie  question, 
"  And  who  is  my  neighbor  ?  "  the  answer  which  he 
received  laid  bare  the  very  foundation  of  practical 
Christian  ethics ;  for  it  was  then  that  the  parable 
of  the  Good  Samaritan  was  related.  The  scribe 
himself  had  just  shown  that  he  was  thoroughly  con- 
versant with  the  supreme  law  of  duty,  and  with 
the  fact  that  it  was  grounded  in  love ;  for,  in  an- 
swer to  a  question  of  the  Master,  he  had  summed 
it  up  in  the  single  sentence,  ''  Thou  shalt  love  the 
Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy  heart,  and  with  all 
thy  soul,  and  with  all  thy  strength,  and  with  all 
thy  mind ;  and  thy  neighbor  as  thyself,"  and  the 
reply  of  Jesus  was,  "Thou  hast  answered  right: 
this  do,  and  thou  shalt  live."  There  was  no  fault 
to  be  found  with  the  moral  theories  of  the  man. 
But  it  would  seem  as  if  he  himself  suspected  that 
whatever  flaws  there  might  be  in  his  practice 
would  be  due  to  some  misinterpretation  of  the 
word  "  neighbor."  He  had  not  been  wont  to  give 
to  it  a  very  wide  meaning.  The  neighbors  of  a  Jew 
were  only  members  of  his  own  race.  But  there  was 
a  new  spirit  in  the  land.  The  old  bottles  had 
begun  to  swell.  The  universalism  of  Jesus  was 
already  producing  its  effects  ;  and  among  them, 
perhaps,  we  are  to  reckon  the  lawyer's  second 
question,  "  And  who  is  my  neighbor  ?  " 

The  definition  which  it  evoked  must  have  star- 
tled   and  bewildered  the  questioner.     The  great 


340    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

Teacher  did  not  choose  for  a  living  illustration  of 
neighborly  kindness  one  of  Jehovah's  own  people. 
He  did  not  single  out  for  his  purpose  some  eccle- 
siastical dignitary  whose  religious  surroundings 
might  be  supposed  to  have  imparted  to  him  a 
peculiar  sanctity.  He  selected  a  member  of  a 
despised  and  hated  race,  with  which  the  Jews  ha- 
bitually refused  to  have  any  dealings,  and  in  which 
no  Israelite  at  that  time  except  Jesus  would  have 
thought  of  looking  for  the  hero  of  a  moral  tale. 
Yet  he  attributed  to  so  unpromising  a  character  a 
course  of  conduct  which  a  prejudiced  Jewish  scribe 
was  obliged  to  confess  exhibited  the  true  neigh- 
borly spirit,  although  by  so  doing  he  necessarily 
commended  a  despised  Samaritan  at  the  expense 
of  certain  religious  representatives  of  his  own 
nation.  And  Christ's  closing  admonition,  "  Go, 
and  do  thou  likewise,"  removed  the  story  from  the 
realm  of  mere  theory  and  sentiment  and  made  it  a 
rule  of  practical  conduct. 

The  love  which  Jesus  inculcated  by  this  touch- 
ing and  impressive  narrative  is  simply  the  love  of 
man  as  man.  Racial  distinctions  he  ignores.  Na- 
tional feuds  cannot  cancel  the  bond  of  humanity. 
The  Samaritan  was  neighbor  to  the  Jew ;  the  Jew 
ought  to  be  neighbor  to  the  Samaritan.  The  Gen- 
tile was  less  an  object  of  loathing  to  the  chosen 
people  than  the  mongrel  race  whose  territory  sepa- 
rated their  two  principal  provinces,  and  so  by  irre- 
sistible inference  the  neighborly  tie  should  be 
established  between  the  seed  of  Abraham  and  the 


LOVE  AND   SERVICE  341 

pagan  outcasts.  The  parable  isolated  the  principle 
of  love  from  all  immaterial  circumstances,  exhibited 
it  mialloyed  with  any  personal,  family,  or  patriotic 
preferences,  framed  it,  as  it  were,  against  a  back- 
ground out  of  which  no  confusing  suspicions  of 
selfish  motives  could  find  their  way  into  it  to  ob- 
scure the  distinctness  of  its  outlines.  The  moral 
of  the  parable  is  that  we  owe  neighborly  duties  to 
any  fellow  being  whom  we  can  help,  no  matter  what 
may  be  his  race  or  what  may  be  our  present  feelings 
towards  him.  Philanthropy  is  lifted  above  such 
extraneous  motives  as  the  natural  attractiveness 
that  may  inhere  in  its  objects  or  as  even  the  wel- 
fare of  the  nation  by  whose  citizens  it  is  exercised. 
Such  considerations  are  not  often,  if  they  are  ever, 
wholly  disinterested.  They  may  not  merit  ethi- 
cally the  highest  praise.  Christian  love  sees  in 
every  human  being,  even  the  lowest  and  most  re- 
pulsive, a  brother.  Its  nearest  neighbors  are  those 
who  most  need  its  help,  wherever  they  are  to  be 
found.  In  distributing  its  benefactions  it  makes 
no  account  of  the  barriers  of  country,  language,  or 
race.  Its  motto  was  partly  anticipated  in  the  famous 
sentiment  of  the  pagan  dramatist,  "  Nothing  that 
pertains  to  man  do  I  regard  as  no  concern  of  mine." 
By  the  very  necessity  of  its  nature,  it  reaches  up 
to  God  and  pays  its  dues  to  him,  while  striving  to 
bless  at  the  same  time  any  one  within  the  scope 
of  its  influence  who  bears  the  name  of  man. 

It  was  to  be  expected  that  a  religion  with  such 
a  conception  of  love,  with  such  an  idea  of  the  unity 


342    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

of  the  human  race,  would  give  to  its  evangelists  a 
broad  commission ;  that  its  command  to  them  would 
be,  "  Go  ye  therefore,  and  make  disciples  of  aU  the 
nations."  In  doing  so  it  was  but  carrying  out  the 
teachings  of  the  parable  we  have  been  considering. 
It  was  pushing  its  avowed  ethical  principles  to  their 
practical  logical  outcome.  The  definition  of  love 
with  which  it  had  familiarized  its  disciples  would 
not  permit  it  to  neglect  any  of  the  sons  of  men. 
Beginning  from  Jerusalem,  they  must  preach 
repentance  and  remission  of  sins  in  the  name  of 
Christ  unto  all  the  nations.  Commencing  at  the 
spot  where  it  first  came  in  contact  with  humanity, 
the  gospel  must  spread  until  it  had  given  of  its 
best  to  the  ignorant  and  the  degraded  in  every  part 
of  the  globe. 

There  can  be  no  essential  distinction  between 
different  kinds  of  missionary  work.  Foreign,  home, 
and  local  missions  are  but  so  many  different  chan- 
nels into  which  the  indivisible  spirit  of  Christian 
love  finds  its  way,  and  if  the  kind  of  love  which 
Jesus  enjoined  is  exhibited  in  any  one  of  them,  it 
is  impossible  that  those  who  are  interested  in  that 
one  should  not  be  interested  in  the  others  also.  A 
lack  of  ability  may  sometimes  prevent  a  Christian 
from  giving  a  practical  expression  of  his  love  for 
his  fellow  men  in  distant  parts  of  the  earth,  but  he 
will  not  be  without  it,  nevertheless.  If  he  says,  I 
believe  in  christianizing  my  own  country  but  have 
no  desire  to  do  similar  work  for  outside  people,  he 
simply  confesses  that  he  has  not  yet  come  into  fidl 


LOVE  AND  SERVICE  343 

sympatliy  with  the  philanthropy  of  the  gospel. 
His  conception  of  love  is  only  tribal.  It  is  on  a 
level  with  that  which  would  define  a  neighbor  as 
a  fellow  countrj^man.  It  is  far  below  the  moral 
standard  of  the  parable  of  the  Good  Samaritan. 

When  a  surveyor  purposes  to  flood  a  field  so  as 
to  cover  every  irregularity  in  its  surface,  he  will 
adjust  his  leveling  instrument  so  as  to  clear  the 
top  of  the  highest  hummock.  The  spider-lines  in 
his  glass  will  be  projected  in  the  form  of  a  cross 
against  a  hillside  miles  away  perhaps.  It  will  make 
no  difference  whether  he  directs  that  the  surface 
of  the  pond  be  raised  as  high  as  that  point,  or  that 
it  be  elevated  until  it  hides  the  hummock ;  the  re- 
sult will  be  the  same  in  both  cases.  Water  main- 
tains its  level.  If  it  covers  the  top  of  the  mound, 
it  will  reach  the  spot  on  the  hillside  which  the 
crossed  lines  had  indicated.  Or  if  it  rises  as  high 
as  that,  it  will  submerge  the  mound.  Whichever 
order  is  carried  out  the  field  will  be  flooded.  So 
Christian  love  cannot  but  seek  its  level.  If  it 
is  genuine  when  it  blesses  those  who  are  nearest,  it 
has  risen  high  enough  to  plant  its  crosses  on  the 
most  distant  shores.  If  it  is  deep  enough  to  make 
sacrifices  for  the  spiritually  needy  in  foreign  lands, 
it  cannot  neglect  those  at  home.  In  no  individual 
case  wiU  it  be  able  to  reach  more  than  a  few  of 
those  in  far-off  climes  who  need  its  help  ;  but  it  is 
not  a  lack  of  love  which  keeps  it  from  furthering 
the  welfare  of  aU.  Its  operations  may  be  narrowed 
by  poverty  or  by  the  impossibility  of  reaching  some 


344    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

shores ;  but  when  these  barriers  give  way  the  tide 
of  benevolence  follows  its  law  and  flows  into  every 
accessible  nook  and  corner  of  the  earth. 

It  is  a  sign  of  spiritual  retrogression,  therefore, 
when  a  church  or  an  individual  determines  to  cut 
off  its  contributions  to  foreign  work  for  no  other 
reason  than  that  there  are  heathen  enough  at  home. 
Doubtless  there  are  ;  but  the  way  to  reach  them  is 
not  to  lower  the  quality  of  love  any  more  than  the 
way  to  deepen  the  water  on  the  nearest  shore  of  a 
lake  is  to  make  it  shallower  on  the  opposite  side. 
The  first  of  all  requisites  for  missionary  success, 
whether  at  home  or  abroad,  is  a  true  missionary 
spirit.  An  indispensable  condition  of  the  largest 
evangelical  power  is  a  humanitarianism  which  is 
independent  of  aU  motives  save  the  love  of  man  as 
man.  The  surest  way  to  create  the  deepest  inter- 
est in  home  missions  is  to  develop  an  interest  in 
foreign  work,  for  this  is  no  more  than  saying  that 
the  best  method  of  getting  the  amplest  results  of 
love  is  to  make  sure  that  love  is  of  the  best  quality. 
When  it  is  equal  to  the  task  of  making  sacrifices 
for  those  who  are  too  remote  geographically  and 
too  unattractive  in  all  respects  to  excite  any  inter- 
est in  them  on  the  part  of  others  save  what  arises 
from  the  fact  that  they  are  members  of  the  human 
family,  it  has  successfully  endured  the  most  deci- 
sive test  of  genuineness  to  which  love  can  be  sub- 
jected. The  affection  which  a  mother  feels  for  her 
children  is  not  always  in  all  respects  commenda- 
ble, for  it  often  leads  her  to  gratify  their  transient 


LOVE  AND  SERVICE  345 

whims  at  the  expense  of  their  truest  interests.  The 
benevolence  which  a  man  practices  in  his  own 
neighborhood  is  not  necessarily  of  a  very  high  type, 
for  pride  in  the  good  name  of  his  town  may  be  at 
the  bottom  of  it.  The  sacrifices  which  the  patriot 
makes  for  his  country  may  be  prompted  by  the 
fact  that  every  increase  of  its  glory  adds  to  his  own 
sense  of  personal  exaltation.  None  of  these  cases 
afford  an  indubitable  expression  of  Christian  love. 
So,  too,  when  some  widespread  disaster,  which 
has  plunged  thousands  of  persons  into  misery,  so 
works  on  public  sympathy  that  men  who  have  not 
been  wont  to  give  now  for  a  time  give  generously, 
we  have  no  example  of  the  truest  beneficence  in 
these  exceptional  acts  of  charity  even  though  some 
of  them  be  of  the  largest.  Philanthropy,  accord- 
ing to  the  Christian  conception  of  it,  is  independent 
of  emotional  excitement  as  well  as  of  considerations 
pertaining  to  locality.  It  does  its  work  steadily 
and  persistently,  blessing  men  wherever  it  can  find 
them,  without  the  stimulus  of  thanks,  in  spite  of 
the  discouragement  of  ingratitude,  needing  the 
spur  of  no  abnormal  and  passing  outburst  of  feel- 
ing. It  finds  its  truest  illustration,  therefore,  in 
the  foreign  missionary  service ;  and  when  it  has 
been  tested  by  the  requirements  of  this  and  not 
found  wanting,  a  stamp  of  genuineness  has  been 
impressed  upon  it  which  is  a  guarantee  against  dis- 
appointment when  it  shaU  be  called  upon  to  meet 
the  needs  of  the  home  work. 

When  the  foliage  of  spring  does  not  extend  to 


346    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

the  ends  of  the  branches,  the  tree  is  dying  at  the 
top.  The  fact  may  be  hidden  for  a  while  by 
pruning  off  the  dead  wood,  but  the  health  of  the 
tree  cannot  be  so  restored.  The  church  which 
lops  off  the  cause  of  foreign  missions  from  its  list 
of  benevolences  may  imagine  that  it  has  promoted 
by  so  doing  the  vigor  of  those  which  it  retains, 
but  it  has  merely  tried  to  put  out  of  sight  the 
evidences  of  a  moribund  condition.  The  lack  of 
spiritual  vitality  which  it  has  thus  betrayed  will 
lead  in  due  time  to  the  amputation  of  charities 
nearer  home.  Let  the  religious  organizations  of 
any  city  undertake  to  economize  their  gifts  in  this 
way,  lured  by  the  specious  hope  of  being  able  thus 
to  supply  more  easily  the  needs  of  their  own  com- 
munity, and  they  will  find  the  area  of  their  active 
sympathy  narrowing  until  it  will  be  hard  at  last 
for  them  to  sustain  their  own  local  benevolences. 
A  distinguished  senator  said  some  years  ago  that 
fourteen  Congregational  churches  in  a  single  county 
of  Massachusetts  gave  more  for  benevolent  objects 
by  thousands  of  dollars  than  his  whole  denomina- 
tion throughout  the  country.  But  though  none  of 
the  poorest,  it  had  almost  no  foreign  missions.  It 
was  not  surprising,  therefore,  that  he  was  obliged 
to  admit  that  it  had  much  difficulty  in  supporting 
a  single  missionary  in  Utah.  Of  course.  Love, 
like  water,  preserves  its  level.  If  it  is  drawn 
down  till  it  leaves  bare  the  opposite  shore,  shoals 
will  appear  close  at  hand.  If  the  sap  does  not 
circulate   vigorously   enough   to   keep   green   the 


LOVE  AND  SERVICE  347 

remote  twigs,  decay  will  soon  show  itself  nearer 
tlie  trunk.  And  the  reason  has  already  been  indi- 
cated. It  lies  in  the  fact  that  the  only  perennial, 
even,  and  inexhaustible  source  of  charity  is  love 
for  man  as  man  rather  than  as  a  countryman  or 
a  fellow  townsman.  Such  a  love  will  extend  its 
beneficence  everywhere,  and  will  be  relatively  free 
from  the  fluctuations  of  interest  and  the  emotional 
ebbs  that  are  inseparable  from  an  affection  of  a 
narrower  scope  which  is  dependent  for  its  contin- 
uance on  visible  results  and  tidal  waves  of  feeling. 
How,  then,  is  this  universal  love  to  be  obtained  ? 
Only  by  loving  universally.  To  broaden  affection 
it  may  be  necessary  at  first  to  force  it  into  chan- 
nels into  which  it  does  not  flow  easily,  especially 
into  those  that  are  far  distant  and  unfamiliar.  It 
is  a  mental  law  that  our  interest  grows  in  that 
which  we  interest  ourselves  in.  Deeds  wrought  at 
first  from  a  cold  sense  of  duty  are  repeated  with 
an  ever  increasing  glow  of  sympathy.  Sacrifices 
made  for  the  stranger  in  the  antipodes  beget  a 
warm  affection  for  him. 

"  Is  thy  cruse  of  comfort  failing  ? 
Rise  and  share  it  with  another ; 
And  through  aU  the  years  of  famine 
It  wiU  serve  thee  and  thy  brother." 

These  lines  are  psychologically  true.  It  is  undenia- 
ble that  "  the  heart  grows  rich  in  giving."  The  will 
may  at  first  only  draw  a  line  in  the  soul  that  marks 
the  course  for  charity  to  pursue,  but  repeated  acts 
of  generosity  wiU  deepen  it  into  a  groove  along 


348    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

which  the  heart  will  send  in  time  a  vital  current. 
Principle  may  labor  dispassionately  in  the  valley  of 
weeping  to  make  it  a  well,  but  the  rain  of  a  kindly 
human  affection  will  ultimately  fill  the  pools.  A 
simj^le  command  of  Christ,  or  a  mere  definition 
of  Christian  love  which  is  followed  by  a  larger 
intellectual  appreciation  of  its  limitless  scope,  may 
serve  as  an  index-finger  to  turn  some  portion  of 
the  Christian's  practical  energy  into  the  foreign 
field,  but  the  expansion  of  soul  which  is  sure  to 
follow  wiU  make  him  conscious  of  the  fraternal 
tie  which  constitutes  him  the  keeper  of  even  the 
least  lovely  of  his  brethren. 

When  the  extremities  are  benumbed  by  the 
cold  of  a  frosty  morning,  a  man  will  often  beat 
himself  violently  with  both  hands  and  stamp 
heavily  on  the  ground  for  a  minute  or  more.  In 
this  way  he  not  only  stimulates  the  ducts  in  the 
parts  immediately  affected,  but  he  stirs  up  the  cen- 
tre and  source  of  circulation  as  well.  He  sets  the 
heart  to  beating  more  quickly,  the  lungs  to  puri- 
fying the  blood  more  rapidly,  the  vital  currents 
to  forcing  their  way  more  powerfully  into  chilled 
fingers  and  toes.  So  an  active  participation  in 
the  foreign  work  produces  an  analogous  twofold 
effect.  It  chafes  the  extremities,  as  it  were,  and 
at  the  same  time  quickens  the  pulses.  It  opens 
the  way  for  the  operations  of  a  world-wide  philan- 
thropy, and  by  so  doing  creates  the  spiritual  force 
which  will  propel  the  sympathies  into  the  new  lines 
of  effort. 


LOVE  AND   SERVICE  349 

We  see,  therefore,  in  almost  the  last  recorded 
utterance  of  Jesus,  "  And  ye  shall  be  my  witnesses 
both  in  Jerusalem,  and  in  all  Judaea  and  Samaria, 
and  unto  the  uttermost  part  of  the  earth,"  the  fair- 
est fruit  of  his  teachings  and  the  surest  test  of  the 
fertility  of  the  church.  They  do  not  indicate  any 
subordinate  Christian  duty.  They  do  not  contain 
a  mere  afterthought  which  has  no  vital  relation  to 
the  main  body  of  gospel  truth.  Nor  do  they  con- 
template the  spiritual  advantage  of  those  only  to 
whom  the  glad  tidings  are  to  be  proclaimed.  They 
have  quite  as  much  reference  to  the  needs  of  those 
to  whom  the  message  is  intrusted.  Obedience  to 
it  is  an  essential  feature  of  Christian  discipline,  an 
indispensable  factor  of  individual  spiritual  develop- 
ment. There  can  be  no  largeness  of  human  nature 
without  the  cultivation  of  broad  and  far-reaching 
human  sympathies.  The  gospel,  like  mercy,  "  bless- 
eth  him  that  gives  and  him  that  takes,"  but  the 
former  is  sure  of  a  personal  growth  which  the  other 
may  not  attain. 

Missionary  service,  therefore,  is  always  success- 
ful. It  may  not  at  first  make  many  converts,  but 
that  is  merely  a  temporary  failure  of  only  one  of 
its  sources  of  influence.  The  lives  that  have  been 
consecrated  to  it,  the  money  that  has  been  spent 
in  it,  the  prayers  that  have  been  offered  up  in 
its  behalf,  the  sympathy  of  thousands  that  has 
attended  it,  the  deepening  of  interest  in  the  igno- 
rant and  unfortunate  that  has  resulted  from  it,  the 
wider  sense  of  human  brotherhood  that  has  been 


350    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY    ' 

promoted  in  all  who  have  helped  to  carry  it  on, 
represent  permanent  gains  to  humanity  which  no 
coldness  of  reception  that  the  message  may  encoun- 
ter at  the  outset  among  those  to  whom  it  is  sent  can 
neutralize.  They  have  augmented  the  average 
ethical  value  of  the  Christian  Church ;  they  have 
improved  the  quality  of  love  in  thousands  of 
Christian  hearts  ;  they  have  deepened  the  reser- 
voirs of  spiritual  force  ;  and  consequently  there  is 
a  larger  capacity  in  the  human  race  for  self-denial 
and  philanthropic  self-sacrifice. 

It  doubtless  seems  strange  to  many  who  appre- 
ciate the  importance  of  the  foreign  work,  and  are 
troubled  at  the  same  time  by  the  slowness  with 
which  the  funds  are  provided  to  carry  it  on,  that 
God  does  not  open  up  some  other  source  of  revenue 
which  will  render  the  work  independent  of  human 
poverty  and  parsimony.  With  that  text  ringing 
in  their  ears,  — 

"  For  every  beast  of  the  forest  is  mine, 
And  the  cattle  upon  a  thousand  hiUs,"  — 

it  is  but  natural  that  their  first  thought  should 
be  a  wish  that  the  Almighty  would  turn  some  of 
his  boundless  wealth  into  the  work  of  evangel- 
izing the  world,  and  so  relieve  the  church  from 
the  incessant  calls  that  are  made  upon  it  for  con- 
tributions. But  if  he  should  do  so,  he  would  sac- 
rifice one  of  the  objects  which  missionary  service 
as  now  conducted  promotes.  He  would  secure  ex- 
pansion at  the  cost  of  depth.  He  would  increase 
the  numbers  of  the  Christian  fraternity  while  neg- 


LOVE  AND  SERVICE  351 

lecting  to  develop  the  spirit  of  brotherhood.  He 
would  defeat  the  crowning  purpose  of  the  gospel, 
which  is  to  develop  a  neighborly  kindness  in 
human  souls,  an  active  beneficence  which  will  bind 
each  to  each  by  the  reciprocal  influence  of  services 
rendered  and  received.  Love  has  climbed  upward 
through  the  ages  in  ever-widening  spirals  from 
seM  to  the  family,  the  tribe,  the  nation.  At  every 
ascent  it  has  dropped  some  crude  narrowness  out 
of  itself.  Like  the  souls  of  the  Buddhistic  evolu- 
tion, it  has  gained  in  purity  by  each  transmigration. 
But  it  must  crown  the  process  by  lifting  itself  up 
to  the  love  of  man  as  man,  for  it  is  only  then  that 
it  will  have  grown  into  love  for  God  as  God.  It 
is  only  then  that  it  will  have  been  freed  from 
all  impurities  and  distilled  into  a  divine  clearness. 
And  there  is  no  way  for  it  to  mount  to  such  celes- 
tial heights  save  by  broadening  the  scope  of  its 
work  until  it  is  ready  to  interest  itself  in  and 
make  sacrifices  for  those  who  are  far  off  as  well  as 
for  those  who  are  near. 

No  doubt  there  were  various  reasons  of  an 
administrative  nature  for  the  world-wide  mission 
which  Jesus  committed  to  his  followers.  One  of 
them  is  found  in  the  fact  that  a  religion  will  spread 
the  faster  the  more  numerous  and  widely  diffused 
are  the  centres  from  which  it  is  propagated.  It 
woidd  be  a  work  of  hopeless  slowness  for  Chris- 
tians to  undertake  to  evangelize  the  world  by  con- 
centrating their  missionary  efforts  on  their  own 
country  and   trusting  that  the  frontiers  of   their 


352    THE  NATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

religious  influence  will  gradually  widen  until  tliey 
shall  embrace  all  the  earth.  The  farmer  who 
burns  over  his  fields  will  kindle  fires  in  numerous 
spots  to  hasten  the  process.  The  persecution  which 
scattered  the  church  at  Jerusalem  was  a  benefit  to 
Christianity,  for  it  flung  the  blazing  brands  of 
truth  in  all  directions,  each  one  of  which  was  to 
start  more  than  one  independent  nucleus  of  mission- 
ary influence  which  would  begin  at  once  to  enlarge 
itself.  The  principal  work  of  the  church  in  the 
foreign  field  in  the  last  century  was  to  plant  its 
torches  in  as  many  localities  as  possible.  The  wis- 
dom and  value  of  the  policy  will  be  made  more 
fully  manifest  later  when  an  ever  increasing  volume 
of  light  shall  be  poured  into  the  darkness  of  the 
world  from  thousands  of  permanent  and  firmly 
established  centres  of  religious  illumination. 

Jesus  may  also  have  had  in  mind,  when  he  sent 
his  disciples  to  all  the  nations,  the  imperative  need 
there  is  of  anticipating  the  evil  influence  which 
the  stronger  races  exert  upon  those  that  are  weak. 
When  Pastor  Robinson  heard  of  the  first  bloody 
collision  between  the  Pilgrims  and  the  Indians, 
and  wrote  back,  "  Would  that  you  had  converted 
some  before  you  had  killed  any,"  he  indicated  a 
difficulty  with  which  the  foreign  missionary  is 
everywhere  confronted.  The  darker  side  of  civili- 
zation reaches  the  field  first.  Commerce  and  war 
too  often  plant  the  tares  before  the  wheat  is  sown. 
Christianity  becomes  a  symbol  of  oppression  and 
vice  before  it  can  associate  itself  in  the  minds  of 


LOVE  AND  SERVICE  353 

an  ignorant  people  with  the  spirit  of  love  and 
mercy.  It  must  encounter  suspicion  and  hostility, 
therefore,  before  it  can  beget  confidence  and  re- 
ceive a  welcome.  If  evil  is  not  to  preempt  large 
sections  of  the  globe,  good  must  enter  them  with 
or  before  it  and  compete  with  it  there  for  mastery. 
If  wickedness  is  not  to  intrench  itself  in  strong:- 
holds  all  over  the  earth  from  which  all  reformative 
influences  will  recoil  in  hopeless  impotence,  there 
must  be  foreign  missionaries  whose  field  is  the 
world,  and  who  wiU  be  at  their  posts  early  enough 
to  prune  the  green  tree  instead  of  the  dry. 

It  may  weU  be  that  the  Master  had  in  mind 
both  of  these  reasons  when  he  left  with  his  church 
the  command,  "Go  ye  into  all  the  world,  and 
preach  the  gospel  to  the  whole  creation."  But 
deeper  than  either  of  them,  outranking  them  both 
in  intrinsic  importance,  is  the  one  which  was  first 
considered,  the  psychological  fact  that  nothing  less 
than  universal  service,  nothing  less  than  a  sense 
of  obligation  to  man  as  man,  nothing  less  than  a 
love  of  humanity  which  is  proof  against  the  draw- 
backs of  distance  and  national  prejudice,  is  com- 
petent to  develop  the  character  which  is  distinc- 
tively Christian,  and  that  this  broadness  of  sympa- 
thy and  human  affection  can  only  be  had  through 
the  medium  of  persistent  efforts  to  promote  the 
welfare  of  the  whole  human  race. 

The  church  is  right,  therefore,  in  exalting  the 
meetings  of  its  foreign  missionary  societies  to 
the  foremost  place  among  its  religious  gatherings. 


354    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY  ' 

The  secular  press  is  riglit  when  it  accords  large 
space  in  its  columns  to  these  annual  convocations. 
The  general  public  is  right  when,  in  spite  of  well- 
meaning  criticisms  and  some  empty  sneers,  it 
regards  them  with  peculiar  interest  and  attention. 
They  represent  not  only  the  high-water  mark  of 
modern  civilization,  but  also  all  that  is  most  pecul- 
iar in  the  practical  ethics  of  Christianity.  They 
exhibit  the  Christian  conception  of  universal  bro- 
therhood in  actual  and  successful  operation.  They 
demonstrate,  and  set  in  so  clear  a  light  that  he  who 
runs  may  read,  the  fact  that  the  church  of  Christ 
does  not  hold  this  conception  as  an  idle  sentiment, 
but  is  furnishing  men  and  women  by  the  hundred, 
and  doUars  by  the  million,  to  aid  their  fellow  crea- 
tures in  all  parts  of  the  earth,  many  of  whom  are 
so  far  below  the  standard  of  civilized  humanity 
that  it  is  hard  sometimes  even  to  call  them  men. 

It  may  be  well  for  a  denomination  to  point  with 
satisfaction  to  the  historians,  the  poets,  the  states- 
men, who  have  held  its  tenets.  The  growth  of  the 
intellect  is  needed  in  order  to  round  out  the  ideal 
manhood  which  we  desire  to  see  evolved.  If  the 
mental  development  of  such  men  is  due  in  any 
way  to  their  religious  beliefs,  the  creeds,  positive 
or  negative,  which  have  evoked  their  genius  or  pro- 
moted their  scholarship  are  not  to  be  regarded  as 
barren  or  unfruitful.  But  we  should  not  permit 
the  glare  of  intellectual  achievement  to  blind  us 
to  the  fact  that  love  is  better  than  learning,  that 
human  nature  is  more  honored   by  philanthropy 


LOVE  AND  SERVICE  355 

than  by  literary  success.  We  should  not  lose 
sight  of  the  fact  that  Christianity  means  not  pri- 
marily the  embellishment  of  the  mind  with  intel- 
lectual graces,  but  its  enlargement  by  the  cultiva- 
tion of  human  sympathies.  As  Jesus  saw  in  the 
widow's  mite  a  richer  gift  than  was  given  by  many 
who  gave  much,  so  he  would  descry,  no  doubt, 
more  that  is  praiseworthy  in  the  humble  talents 
that  are  consecrated  on  God's  altar  to  the  service 
of  some  benighted  pagan  tribe  than  in  the  most 
scholarly  tome  or  the  most  brilliant  poem  which 
has  no  higher  aim  than  to  add  to  the  information 
or  the  pleasure  of  an  educated  people. 

There  was  little  of  culture  in  the  men  who  left 
their  nets  to  follow  Jesus.  Even  Paul  labored  at 
a  disadvantage  when  the  polished  Greeks  began 
to  criticise  his  oratory.  But  he  and  his  fellow 
apostles  exemplified  something  better  than  secular 
learning,  something  of  more  value  than  intellec- 
tual refinement.  They  were  almost  the  sole  living 
representatives  of  the  highest  ethical  possibilities 
of  human  nature.  They  were  at  the  head  of  a 
small  group  of  devoted  men  who  were  imparting 
reality  to  the  conception  of  unselfish  love  by  ex- 
hibiting it  in  practical  operation.  And  their  suc- 
cessors in  our  own  time,  who  are  willing  to  sunder 
ties  of  country  and  home  for  the  purpose  of  preach- 
ing the  unsearchable  riches  of  Christ  to  those  who 
have  no  claim  upon  them  save  what  is  created  by 
the  fact  that  both  helpers  and  helped  share  a  com- 
mon humanity,  are  keeping  before  the  eyes  of  men 


356    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

that  spiritual  plane  which  raises  those  who  live  on 
it,  even  when  they  are  but  little,  far  above  the 
greatest  and  wisest  of  those  whose  highest  motives 
pertain  to  a  lower  ethical  level.  They  are  not  only 
giving  proofs  in  their  own  persons  that  the  atmos- 
phere of  self-abnegation  in  which  Jesus  lived  and 
did  his  work  is  one  that  can  be  breathed  by  human 
beings  of  a  lower  spiritual  order,  but  they  furnish 
a  stepping-stone  by  which  multitudes  who  cannot 
follow  them  personally  to  foreign  lands  may, 
through  the  medium  of  a  practical  and  self-sacrific- 
ing sympathy  with  them,  mount  into  a  like  human- 
itarian broadness. 

The  world  and  even  considerable  sections  of  the 
Christian  Church  have  yet  to  learn  that  the  spirit 
of  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  an  absolute  love  such 
as  has  thus  been  described ;  that  the  very  essence 
of  Christianity  is  an  interest  in  men  which  is 
neither  chilled  by  any  repulsiveness  in  them  nor 
dependent  on  any  attractiveness  they  may  possess, 
—  such  a  sympathy  with  needy  humanity  as  Jesus 
exemplified  so  touchingly  and  eloquently  when,  in 
spite  of  the  prejudices  of  his  time  and  the  inherent 
disagreeableness  of  the  act,  he  laid  the  hand  of 
a  brother  on  the  person  of  a  loathsome  leper.  It 
was  a  gesture  pregnant  with  meaning,  and  illus- 
trated the  conditions  of  evangelistic  success  as  did 
no  other  act  performed  by  him,  not  excepting  that 
of  washing  the  disciples'  feet.  It  emphasized  and 
iUumined  the  fact  that  no  natural  feelings  of  dis- 
inclination or  repugnance  ought  to  be  allowed  to 


LOVE  AND  SERVICE  357 

stand  in  the  way  of  liim  who  is  able  to  help  a  fel- 
low mortal.  It  is  by  the  performance  of  what 
might  seem  at  first  unpleasant  missionary  duties 
that  the  Christian  Church  lays  its  fraternal  hand 
on  humanity  as  a  whole. 

It  is  the  belief  of  orthodoxy  that  the  work  of 
Christ  himself  was  the  grandest  exhibition  of  for- 
eign missionary  zeal  which  the  history  of  the  uni- 
verse has  afforded.  Every  Christian  worker  who 
turns  his  back  on  the  allurements  and  promises  of 
secular  pursuits  is  but  repeating  on  a  small  scale 
the  sacrifice  which  is  described  in  the  apostle's 
words,  "  Though  he  was  rich,  yet  for  your  sakes 
he  became  poor."  The  hostility  and  resistance 
which  Christian  teachers  are  encountering  to-day 
in  China  and  elsewhere  have  their  parallel  in  the 
experiences  of  Jesus  as  set  forth  in  the  texts, 
"  While  we  were  yet  sinners,  Christ  died  for  us," 
and  "  While  we  were  enemies,  we  were  reconciled 
to  God  through  the  death  of  his  Son."  And  that 
passage  in  Philippians,  "  Who,  being  in  the  form 
of  God,  counted  it  not  a  prize  to  be  on  an  equality 
with  God,  but  emptied  himself,  taking  the  form  of 
a  servant,  being  made  in  the  likeness  of  men ;  and 
being  found  in  fashion  as  a  man,  he  humbled  him- 
self, becoming  obedient  even  unto  death,  yea,  the 
death  of  the  cross,"  recording  as  it  does  a  swift 
series  of  sacrifices  for  the  good  of  man,  seems  to 
make  audible  to  us  the  footfalls  of  di\dne  love  as 
it  descends  one  after  another  the  successive  steps 
in  the  stairway  of  a  sublime  self-humiliation.     It 


358    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

is  the  belief  of  orthodoxy  that  the  duty  of  imi- 
tating Christ  involves  that  of  climbing  down  the 
relatively  short  ladder  by  which  the  more  civilized 
races  can  reach  the  level  of  those  which  are  least 
enlightened,  and  of  so  exemplifying  a  seK-sacri- 
ficing  love  which  is  willing  to  help  even  the  lowest 
into  the  Way,  the  Truth,  and  the  Life. 

It  may  be  superfluous  for  me  to  state  that  I  do 
not  imply  that  there  is  necessarily  any  truer  love 
shown  by  the  foreigTi  missionary  than  by  him  who 
labors  in  the  home  field.  I  have  had  little  success 
in  making  myself  understood,  if  I  have  not  con- 
veyed the  idea  that  if  both  are  really  serving  Christ 
they  have  precisely  the  same  spirit.  Whether  a 
man  or  a  woman  will  work  in  some  lawless  west- 
ern town,  or  among  the  savages  in  some  far  distant 
island,  or  in  the  slums  of  the  city  in  which  either 
was  born,  will  be  determined  by  circumstances 
which  will  probably  justify  the  choice  that  will  be 
made.  No  branch  of  missionary  work  ought  to  be 
neglected,  and  special  considerations  will  lead  some 
to  choose  one  and  some  another.  If  there  are 
those  who  regard  themselves  as  best  fitted  for  home 
work,  it  is  for  that  reason  and  not  from  any  nar- 
rowness of  sympathy  that  they  do  not  enter  the 
foreign  service.  If  there  are  those  whose  experi- 
ences have  given  them  a  peculiar  interest  in  the 
religious  needs  of  their  own  town,  they  do  not 
devote  their  lives  to  supplying  these  because  they 
have  not  enough  of  the  spirit  of  Christ  in  them  to 
labor  on  the  other  side  of  the  globe.     On  the  con- 


LOVE  AND  SERVICE  359 

trary,  it  is  because  a  man  has  that  broad  love  for 
humanity  which  reveals  to  him  a  brother  in  the 
most  degraded  savage  in  the  most  distant  parts  of 
the  earth  that  he  is  able  to  consecrate  himself  so 
earnestly  to  the  work  he  is  doing  for  his  Master 
in  his  own  country  or  neighborhood.  The  one  way 
to  generate  a  spiritual  force  that  will  be  equal  to 
the  demands  of  the  home  field  is  to  create  an  ac- 
tive interest  in  the  work  abroad.  E^'^ery  foreign 
missionary  sermon  is  a  home  missionary  sermon. 
It  is  calculated  to  arouse  a  feeling  of  which  the 
home  work  will  also  reap  the  benefit. 

In  a  town  which  gets  its  water  from  a  pond 
there  may  be  houses  so  high  that  when  the  pond 
is  low  no  water  will  flow  from  the  faucets  in  the 
upper  rooms.  In  that  case  the  pressure  will  be 
less  everywhere,  and  if  a  fire  breaks  out,  the  jets 
from  the  hydrants  may  fail  to  reach  a  burning 
roof.  What  is  needed  is  a  rain  that  will  fill  the 
pond  to  the  brim  and  cause  the  water  to  rush  with 
violence  from  the  stop-cocks  in  the  highest  attics. 
Then  the  streams  from  the  street  mains  will  be 
powerful  enough  to  wet  the  tops  of  the  loftiest 
buildings,  and  a  new  force  will  be  added  to  the  jets 
that  are  lower  down.  So  what  is  needed  to  give 
new  impetus  to  local  benevolence  and  home  mis- 
sionary work  is  such  a  deepening  of  the  spirit  of 
fraternal  love  in  the  hearts  of  a  Christian  people 
as  will  send  the  water  of  life  with  vigor  into  the 
most  distant  parts  of  the  earth.  The  energy  thus 
evolved  will  make  itself  felt  in  every  department 
of  charitable  work. 


360    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

A  brief  summary  of  the  positions  I  have  sought 
to  establish  in  these  chapters  may  serve  to  make 
clearer  the  general  trend  of  thought. 

1.  Any  man  may  rationally  assume  to  be  true 
— -'  especially  if  he  purposes  to  verify  his  assump- 
tion by  appropriate  action  —  any  not  improbable 
teachings  which  are  not  as  yet  susceptible  of  sci- 
entific demonstration,  as  is  shown  conclusively 
by  the  fact  that  in  no  other  way  can  most  of  the 
practical  knowledge  which  is  needed  by  men  be 
obtained,  or  even  a  prolonged  course  of  scientific 
investigation  be  carried  on.  Therefore,  the  body 
of  facts  connoted  by  orthodox  Christianity,  if  they 
cannot  be  shown  to  transcend  the  bounds  of  prob- 
ability, may  be  properly  accepted  as  true  until  they 
shall  have  been  proved  false  by  the  test  of  a  sub- 
sequent experience,  or  in  some  other  way. 

2.  Consequently,  it  may  be  fairly  assumed  —  at 
least  provisionally  —  that  the  earth  is  under  the 
active  dominion  of  a  creative  and  superintending 
Mind,  of  a  Being  who  is  developing  mankind  into 
a  likeness  to  himself  ;  for  not  only  is  such  an  as- 
sumption not  improbable  in  itself,  but  it  is  even  ren- 
dered in  a  certain  degree  probable  by  the  fact  that 
it  is  a  corollary  of  the  theory  of  evolution,  a  theory 
which  is  deemed  in  the  highest  degree  probable  by 
a  large  majority  of  competent  scholars. 

3.  It  may  be  rationally  taken  for  granted,  also, 
—  at  least  as  a  working  hypothesis,  —  that  this 
Being  possesses  a  moral  character  whose  crowning 
trait  is  unselfish  love ;  for  so  much  would  be  in- 


LOVE  AND  SERVICE  361 

ferred  from  the  fact  that  the  race  which  it  is  sup- 
posed is  being  developed  into  his  likeness  is  coming 
more  and  more  to  recognize  such  a  love  as  its 
supreme  ethical  ideal,  while  such  facts  as  evil  and 
pain,  the  only  ones  which  are  alleged  to  be  incom- 
patible with  such  a  love,  may  really  contravene  only 
an  incorrect  conception  of  omnipotence. 

4.  The  two  assumptions  thus  named  —  what- 
ever may  be  their  original  credibihty  —  can  be 
experimentally  demonstrated  by  any  one  to  his 
own  satisfaction  to  be  sound  by  an  inductive  pro- 
cess which  differs  in  no  particular  worthy  of  men- 
tion from  that  by  which  many  another  fact  is  con- 
sidered to  have  been  scientifically  established,  and 
which  requires  on  the  part  of  him  who  performs  it 
almost  nothing  more  than  a  broadening  of  his  field 
of  scientific  research  and  a  loyalty  to  the  ethical 
standards  which  are  recognized  by  evolution  and 
by  the  best  moral  philosophy  of  the  time. 

5.  As  it  may  thus  be  shown  to  be  at  least  prob- 
able that  there  is  a  Supreme  Being  with  such  a 
character  as  has  already  been  described,  this  fact 
removes,  according  to  the  admissions  of  competent 
authorities,  any  antecedent  improbability  there 
might  otherwise  have  been  that  the  sphere  of  nat- 
ural law  with  which  we  are  familiar  would  ever 
be  transcended  by  phenomena  which  we  call  mira- 
cles, and  justifies  us  in  believing  that  this  has  been 
done,  if  it  can  be  shown  that  there  was  a  j)ressing 
need  of  its  being  done,  and  that  there  is  a  reasona- 
ble amount  of  evidence  that  a  miracle  has  been 


362    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS   OF  ORTHODOXY 

wrought.  That  such  a  need  existed  is  made  suffi- 
ciently obvious  by  the  consideration  that  the  human 
race  would  not  have  reached  even  approximately 
its  present  ethical  level  but  for  a  widespread  belief 
in  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  which  belief  can  only 
be  accounted  for  by  supposing  that  either  the 
alleged  miracle  actually  took  place,  or  else  that 
events  have  been  providentially  so  ordered  as 
to  necessitate  an  erroneous  conviction  that  it  did 
occur.  The  latter  alternative,  however,  is  not  only 
objectionable  in  itself,  but  it  is  opposed  to  a  body 
of  evidence  in  behaK  of  the  resurrection  which,  as 
the  assumed  improbability  of  miracles  has  now 
been  more  than  neutrahzed,  meets  all  the  require- 
ments of  an  historical  demonstration. 

6.  The  testimony  of  the  witnesses  to  the  resur- 
rection is  not  invalidated  or  rendered  at  all  ques- 
tionable by  any  discrepancies  to  be  found  in  it, 
because  these  are  only  normal  in  quantity  and  dif- 
ficulty, and  do  not  exceed,  if  they  equal,  in  these 
respects  those  occurring  in  other  testimony  on  the 
strength  of  which  other  facts  are  unquestioningly 
believed. 

7.  If  it  may  be  reasonably  presumed  that  God 
has  wrought  miracles,  it  must  seem  more  than  prob- 
able that  he  has  provided  a  means  by  which  his 
purpose  in  so  doing  can  be  made  intelligible  to 
those  for  whose  spiritual  welfare  these  exceptional 
events  were  brought  about.  And  since  it  is  his 
uniform  custom  to  convey  instruction  to  the  human 
race  through  the  medium  of  individuals  belonging 


LOVE  AND  SERVICE  363 

to  it,  we  may  fairly  suppose  that  he  would  see  to  it 
that  there  should  be  some  who  would  faithfully  re- 
cord and  expound  the  teachings  which  the  miracles 
were  designed  to  enforce.  As  the  Hebrew  race  is 
recognized  as  having  evinced  the  deepest  spiritual 
loiowledge  which  mankind  has  ever  achieved,  we 
may  rationally  expect  to  find  in  its  highest  utter- 
ances —  which  are  to  be  looked  for  especially  in 
the  New  Testament  —  the  key  to  the  teachings 
referred  to.  And  as  a  revelation  necessarily  im- 
phes  an  ability  on  the  part  of  mankind  to  under- 
stand it,  we  shall  be  convinced  that  the  interpreta- 
tion of  those  teachings  which  has  been  generally 
held  from  the  beginning  is  substantially  correct. 

8.  The  New  Testament  standard  of  ethics  which 
we  thus  constrain  ourselves  to  approve  is  in  har- 
mony with  that  which,  as  previously  shown,  is 
taught  by  natural  religion ;  and  we  have  thus  a 
twofold  reason  for  regarding  it  as  divinely  revealed. 
It  is  so  high,  however,  that  it  would  seem  imprac- 
ticable, and  therefore  prove  discouraging  to  most 
men,  if  it  were  not  supplemented  by  stimulating 
facts  which  would  enable  them  to  regard  it  as  within 
their  reach.  When,  therefore,  we  find  such  facts 
affirmed  in  connection  with  it  by  writers  whom  we 
are  already  prepared  to  regard  to  some  extent  as 
the  mouthpieces  of  God,  we  are  justified  in  accept- 
ing these  facts,  not  only  on  that  account,  but  also 
because  if  it  is  rational  for  us  to  believe  that  the 
moral  teachings  of  the  gospel  are  in  any  sense  re- 
vealed by  God,  it  is  irrational  for  us  not  to  believe 


364    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

that  those  doctrines  are  equally  divine  without 
which  Christian  ethics  would  secure  little  or  no 
practical  hold  on  men. 

9.  Under  the  general  head  of  the  dogmatic 
teachings  which  we  are  thus  prepared  to  accept  is 
the  doctrine  that  God  became  incarnate  in  Jesus 
Christ,  which  is  not  only  clearly  taught  in  the 
New  Testament,  but  also  derives  additional  sanc- 
tion from  the  facts  that  without  it  God  could  not 
have  adequately  revealed,  so  far  as  we  can  see,  the 
spirit  of  self-sacrificing  love  which  underlies  his 
character,  and  the  world  would  have  been  obliged 
to  do  without  the  ethical  inspiration  which  it  has 
obtained  from  its  grandest  belief. 

10.  Under  the  same  general  head  is  included 
the  doctrine  of  the  Atonement,  which  is  not  only 
plainly  taught  by  the  men  from  whom  we  have 
obtained  our  highest  conceptions  of  moral  obliga- 
tion, but  is  rendered  practically  inseparable  from 
these  by  the  fact  that,  whether  or  not  sin  creates 
any  objective  barrier  between  man  and  God,  there 
is  almost  sure  to  be  one  of  a  subjective  nature  in 
the  tendency  of  remorse  to  magnify  the  difficulty 
of  obtaining  divine  pardon,  a  tendency  which  is 
liable  to  discourage  those  who  would  otherwise  be 
moved  to  acquire  a  spiritual  character. 

11.  To  the  same  class  of  teachings  belongs  the 
doctrine  of  Justification  by  Faith,  which  is  indis- 
pensable to  a  perfect  moral  code,  because  without 
it  there  is  in  the  way  of  every  man  who  has  broken 
the  moral  law  a  psychological  obstacle  which  is 


LOVE   AND  SERVICE  366 

well-nigh  certain  to  impart  a  selfish  cast  even  to 
his  efforts  to  serve  God. 

12.  And  the  same  doctrine  receives  a  new  acces- 
sion of  credibility  from  the  fact  that  it  conditions 
spiritual  success  on  the  cultivation  of  the  same 
valuable  qualities  without  which  no  success  in  sec- 
ular life  is  attainable. 

13.  As  the  love  which  the  gospel  teaches  is  a 
comprehensive  principle  of  action  from  the  benefits 
of  which  no  human  being  whom  it  is  possible  to 
help  may  be  rightfully  excluded,  the  surest  proof 
that  one  has  enlarged  his  nature  to  the  magnitude 
of  that  spirit  is  found  in  a  missionary  zeal  which 
extends  the  right  hand  of  a  practical  Christian 
fellowship  to  the  spiritually  and  temporally  needy 
in  all  parts  of  the  earth  and  in  all  divisions  of  the 
human  family. 

The  considerations  adduced  in  the  foregoing 
pages  would  seem  to  make  it  clear  that  the  accept- 
ance of  what  is  commonly  known  as  evangelical 
Christianity  involves  no  leap  into  the  unknown 
that  can  be  regarded  as  unreasonably  taxing  the 
mental  and  moral  powers  of  any  man.  On  the 
contrary,  the  evidence  that  can  be  urged  in  sup- 
port of  the  various  dogmas  and  beliefs  which  have 
been  examined,  and  of  others  besides,  is  far  stronger 
than  that  on  which  many  a  scientific  hypothesis 
is  founded  at  the  outset ;  and  no  one  can  be  prop- 
erly accused  of  breaking  with  the  spirit  of  a  scien- 
tific age  who  adopts  them  with  the  expectation  that 


366    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

they  will  be  verified  by  a  lifelong  induction  of  his 
spiritual  experiences.  Any  just  criticisms  that  can 
be  made  in  this  connection  must  be  directed  against 
him  who  pursues  a  different  course.  Science  can- 
not be  admitted  to  have  an  ethical  right  to  ap- 
proach all  propositions,  whatever  they  may  be,  in 
a  spirit  of  absolute  indifference  as  to  whether  they 
shall  prove  true  or  false.  Although  such  a  spirit 
may  be  useful  and  commendable  when  dealing  with 
theories  which  aim  only  at  satisfying  the  curiosity 
of  men,  it  becomes  ethically  unsound  when  it  is 
cherished  towards  efforts  made  for  the  ameliora- 
tion of  human  suffering.  If  an  unknown  pestilence 
is  decimating  a  community,  it  must  be  treated  em- 
pirically or  not  at  all ;  for  science  does  not  as  yet 
know  the  proper  remedies.  The  physician  who 
should  be  utterly  indifferent  towards  such  as  might 
be  suggested,  who  should  not  entertain  a  desire 
that  they  might  prove  efficacious,  who  should  not 
manifest  that  desire  by  giving  them  the  first  place 
in  his  laboratory  experiments,  would  outrage  the 
moral  sense  of  the  whole  community. 

Christianity  seeks  to  cure  the  moral  ailments  of 
an  unhappy  world.  It  aims  to  meet  the  immedi- 
ate spiritual  needs  of  men.  Science  cannot  do  so, 
for  she  works  for  the  species,  not  for  the  individual. 
Her  discoveries  may  be  expected  to  benefit  the 
human  race,  but  the  generation  in  which  she  begins 
a  particular  line  of  investigation  may  not  profit  by 
the  results.  "  Art  is  long,  and  time  is  fleeting." 
Even   if   she   shaU   eventually   demonstrate   that 


LOVE  AND  SERVICE  367 

every  essential  doctrine  of  the  Christian  religion  is 
true,  those  now  living  can  reap  no  benefit  from 
the  fact.  The  fears,  heartaches,  sins,  and  selfish- 
ness which  are  now  in  the  world  need  help.  Chris- 
tianity promises  its  aid  at  once  and  knowledge 
afterwards.  The  light  that  is  needed  for  instant 
use  it  accords  to  faith ;  the  scientific  proof  which 
the  intellect  craves  it  engages  to  provide  through 
the  medium  of  a  later  personal  experience.  Under 
these  circumstances,  ought  it  to  be  halted  at  the 
barred  gates  of  this  moral  infirmary  which  we  call 
the  earth  and  dance  attendance  there  until  suspi- 
cious porters  have  cross-examined  it  to  their  satis- 
faction through  the  wicket,  or  ought  it  to  find  all 
doors  open  and  servants  in  waiting  who  will  eagerly 
guide  it  to  the  bedside  of  the  sick  ?  In  a  word, 
should  it  encounter  in  scientific  men  a  friendly 
welcome  and  a  philanthropic  willingness  to  give 
it  a  trial,  or  only  a  skeptical  distrust  which  will 
have  no  concern  save  to  pick  flaws  in  its  letters  of 
introduction  ? 

These  questions  would  hardly  seem  to  need 
an  answer.  Science  does  not  outrank  benevolence. 
Any  scientific  canons  which  would  relieve  a  man 
from  the  obligation  to  give  the  most  pressing 
needs  of  his  fellow  men  the  right  of  way  in  his 
search  for  truth  are  ethically  false.  The  man  of 
science  should  be  first  of  all  a  Christian,  in  order 
that,  while  he  is  pursuing  his  investigations  in  his 
chosen  fields  of  secular  study,  he  may  at  the  same 
time  be  testing  by  the  experiences  of  a  spiritual 


368    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

life  the  sublime  religious  propositions  by  wbich 
the  gospel  would  uplift  humanity.  He  cannot  be 
true  at  once  to  the  scientific  spirit  and  to  the 
dictates  of  an  enlightened  moral  sense  unless  he 
carries  his  scientific  methods  first  of  all  into  the 
field  of  experimental  religion,  and  so  finds  out  for 
himseK  how  much  of  truth  there  is  in  the  utter- 
ances of  those  consecrated  souls  who  claim  to  have 
found  God  and  eternal  truth  by  following  the 
counsels  of  Jesus  Christ.  "  Art  thou  the  teacher 
of  Israel  and  understandest  not  these  things  ?  "  is 
a  reproach  which  is  incurred  by  every  one  who  has 
become  an  authority  in  any  department  of  secular 
kuowledge  while  neglecting  to  explore  the  infinitely 
more  important  field  of  spiritual  truth. 

It  would  follow,  then,  that  no  man  is  justified 
in  taking  refuge  in  agnosticism  to  escape  from  the 
urgent  demands  of  Christianity  for  religious  action. 
He  may  rightfully  remain  an  agnostic  in  reference 
to  matters  which  he  can  properly  excuse  himseK 
from  investigating ;  but  if  his  use  of  the  term  im- 
plies that  he  is  warranted  in  refusing  to  make  a 
personal  test  of  the  most  momentous  subject  that 
can  engage  human  attention  and  in  continuing 
willfully  ignorant  of  facts  which  are  vital  to  the 
highest  interests  of  the  human  race,  he  has  taken 
a  position  which  is  capable  of  neither  rational  nor 
ethical  defense.  Every  Christian  at  the  beginning 
of  his  religious  career  is  an  agnostic  in  the  strict 
meaning  of  the  word,  for  he  has  had  no  scientific 
demonstration  of  the  truth  of  what  he  believes; 


LOVE  AND  SERVICE  369 

but  he  becomes  worthy  of  the  highest  commen- 
dation, both  from  a  scientific  and  an  ethical  point 
of  view,  when  he  refuses  to  recognize  his  agnos- 
ticism as  a  desirable  or  permanent  mental  condi- 
tion, and  devotes  his  life  to  the  experimental  veri- 
fication of  the  religious  teachings  on  which  the 
dearest  hopes  of  humanity  depend. 

In  view  of  all  the  facts  which  have  thus  been 
presented,  it  would  be  idle  to  deny  to  orthodoxy  a 
place  among  the  rational  beliefs  of  mankind,  or  to 
affirm  that  there  is  any  solid  ground  for  the  pre- 
diction that  it  will  ever  be  degraded  from  the  high 
rank  it  has  always  occupied  as  the  most  potent 
of  all  the  ethical  influences  that  have  ever  been 
brought  to  bear  upon  the  human  race.  So  long 
as  human  nature  shall  continue  to  be  what  it  is  in 
the  present  and  what 'it  has  ever  been  in  the  past, 
so  long  as  it  shall  be  conscious  of  its  present  spir- 
itual needs  and  amenable  to  the  motives  by  which 
it  is  now  swayed,  so  long  will  the  creeds  of  so- 
called  evangelical  Christianity  be  held  for  substance 
of  doctrine  by  the  great  mass  of  the  followers  of 
Christ.  Not  until  behefs  shall  have  no  important 
influence  on  conduct,  not  until  the  conduct  shall 
be  ethically  so  high  as  to  need  the  stimulus  of  no 
doctrinal  beliefs,  will  the  obvious  teachings  of  the 
gospel  be  superfluous  and  outworn.  Orthodoxy  is 
built  on  the  foundation  of  human  wants.  It  has 
maintained  its  place  in  the  world  against  the  at- 
tacks of  powerful  enemies,  and  while  hampered  by 
the  weight  of  many  a  mistaken  tenet,  only  because 


370    THE  RATIONAL   BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

it  has  appealed  with  irresistible  force  to  the  com- 
bined spiritual,  moral,  and  logical  needs  of  the 
himian  race ;  and  until  these  shaU  be  done  away 
with,  its  preservation  is  sure. 

That  philosophical  crudities  will  stiU  be  filtered 
out  of  its  statements  of  belief  is  to  be  expected. 
That  education  and  reflection  will  broaden  the 
original  creed  of  individuals  and  promote  them, 
as  it  were,  grade  by  grade,  into  an  ever  increasing 
rationality  of  faith  can  be  taken  for  granted. 
That  denominations  will  always  exist,  and  that 
some  of  these  will  repudiate  doctrines  which  are 
deemed  by  others  indispensable  to  the  life  of  the 
Christian  Church  may  be  unhesitatingly  predicted. 
No  creed  or  dogma  is  of  any  practical  value  save 
as  it  furthers  the  moral  growth  of  him  who  holds 
it,  nor  is  it  likely  to  be  held  with  any  intensity 
of  conviction  unless  it  has  been  made  a  factor  in 
the  life  and  verified  by  an  experience  of  its  utility. 
No  one  will  be  able  to  cherish  more  than  a  per- 
functory belief  in  the  Trinity  unless  he  has  become 
sensible  of  the  need  of  some  theological  statement 
which  shall  give  at  least  a  semblance  of  self-con- 
sistency to  the  teachings  of  Scripture  regarding 
the  nature  of  Christ ;  nor  will  any  one  be  likely  to 
contend  very  strenuously  for  the  doctrine  of  Jus- 
tification by  Faith  unless,  like  Paul  and  Luther, 
he  has  learned  what  it  is  to  reach  the  end  of  his 
spiritual  resources  in  a  fruitless  attempt  to  live  up 
to  the  requirements  of  his  own  moral  law. 

Denominations  illustrate  by  their  existence  the 


LOVE  AND  SERVICE  371 

fact  that  all  the  teachings  of  Christianity  do  not 
appeal  to  all  men  with  equal  force,  and  the  kindi^ed 
fact  that  mankind  is  divided  into  various  distinct 
groups  by  emotional,  intellectual,  or  aesthetic  pe- 
cidiarities  which  make  it  desirable  that  even  the 
same  truths  should  be  presented  in  different  ways. 
There  are  some  churches  which  could  not  exist  at 
all  except  in  an  atmosphere  which  is  already  satu- 
rated with  beliefs  which  were  due,  at  the  outset,  to 
the  influence  of  dogmas  which  these  churches  have 
rejected.  There  are  individual  Clu-istians  who 
have  in  the  same  way  overturned  the  ladder  by 
which  they  mounted  to  their  present  ethical  level. 
Theological  beliefs  frequently  become  atrophied  in 
individual  experience  from  lack  of  use.  They  die 
out  because  the  ethical  ambition  to  which  they 
once  proved  stepping-stones  has  come  to  be  suffi- 
cient in  itself  and  no  longer  feels  the  need  of  a 
special  stimulus  from  without,  because  the  soul 
which  they  once  helped  to  unite  with  God  is  now 
conscious  of  divine  adoption  and  no  longer  craves 
the  aid  of  dogmatic  encouragement.  But  notwith- 
standing all  diversities  of  ministrations  and  work- 
ings, it  may  be  confidently  affirmed  that  the  tenets 
of  orthodoxy  will  still  be  the  mainspring  from 
which  the  force  that  is  to  redeem  human  nature 
wlQ  be  derived. 

Moreover,  so  long  as  it  shall  be  conceded  that 
but  for  a  belief  in  the  miracles  of  the  New  Testa^ 
ment  the  human  race  as  a  whole  would  have  lacked 
an  adequate  appreciation  of  the  self-sacrificing  love 


372    THE  RATIONAL  BASIS  OF  ORTHODOXY 

of  God,  the  ability  to  realize  that  sin  has  not  erected 
an  impossible  barrier  between  any  man  and  his 
Maker,  the  sense  of  security  which  is  indispensable 
to  an  unselfish  religious  service,  and,  in  general, 
the  ethical  stimulus  which  has  made  modern  civil- 
ization possible,  so  long  will  the  supernaturalism 
of  the  gospel  be  recognized  as  one  of  its  essential 
features  and  prove  an  inseparable  adjunct  of  the 
Christian  doctrines  in  securing  a  world-wide  adop- 
tion of  the  ethics  of  Christ. 


INDEX 


INDEX 


Absolute,  the,  53,  54,  74,  258. 

Acts,  Book  of,  date,  etc.,  13 

Agnosticism,  20,  368. 

Alford,  Dean,  172,  249. 

Altruism,  CO,  289. 

Apocalypse,  Deitj'  of  Christ,  252. 

Arnold,  Edwin,  "Light  of  Asia,"  231. 

Arnold,  Matthew,  54. 

Atonement,  theories  of,  71,  263-266, 
269,  273-283  ;  objections,  267,  268, 
272  ;  need  of,  278 ;  psychology  of, 
278,  304  ;  definition  needless,  280  ; 
many-sided,  282,  285  ;  blood  of 
Christ,  283. 

Bacon,  inductive  reasoning,  88. 
Baur,  127;  resurrection,  124  ;  dates  of 

Gospels,  128  ;  Christ  in  Apocalypse, 

252. 
Belief,  2  ;  voluntary,  22  ;  and  conduct, 

118,  226,  320,  369,   371.   (See  also 

Faith.) 
Bible  as  literature,  183. 
Bismarck  and  Napoleon,  145-149. 
Brown,  on  miracles,  106. 
Buddhism,  56,  231. 
Busch,  Dr.,  149,  150. 
Butler,  Bishop,  immortality,  6. 

Christ,  resurrection  of,  161-174  ;  ethi- 
cal ideal,  214,  217  ;  and  Nathanael, 
215  ;  self-abnegation  of,  233  ;  attri- 
butes, 243-247  ;  divinity,  257  ;  and 
human  needs,  285  ;  a  missionary, 
357. 

Christian,  how  to  become  a,  322. 

Christianity,  defective  proof  of,  5,  7, 
9,  13,  26 ;  an  hypothesis,  25  ;  how 
proved,  14 ;  and  science,  15,  26 ; 
value  of  evidences,  15  ;  adapted  to 
crisis,  15,  366  ;  source  of  energy,  16, 
24,  317-321  ;  ethically  discouraging, 
204,  223,  224  ;  elements  of,  210  ;  sup- 
ports in  human  nature,  212;  its  con- 


trasts,  213 ;  secret  of  influence,  214 ; 

and  mechanical  powers,  217. 
Chronicles,  idealism  of,  191. 
Cleopas,  169,  171,  173. 
Commentaries,  utility  of,  223. 
Conscience,  growth  of,  60. 
Contemporary  Review,  on  belief,  2. 
Creeds,  221,  222  ;  and  ethics,  370. 

Dabwin,  embryology,  42 ;  love,  61  ; 
and  his  critics,  65  ;  and  Milton,  69  ; 
persistence  of  traits,  203. 

Dawson,  physical  selection,  30  ;  phy- 
logeny,  48. 

Deduction,  79-82. 

Denominations,  utility  of,  370. 

Descartes  on  truth,  1. 

Design,  argument  from,  5,  89,  103. 

Discrepancies,  141 ;  in  Gospels,  142  ; 
normal,  143-160  ;  as  to  resurrection, 
160-174. 

Dogma,  undervalued,  203  ;  and  ethics, 
207,  213,  215,  219,  220,  225  ;  of  im- 
mortality, 208  ;  adoption,  209  ;  mu- 
table element  in,  209  ;  constant  ele- 
ment, 211  ;  Trinity,  222,  258,  370 ; 
broadening  influence,  226  ;  incarna- 
tion, 230-262  ;  atonement,  263-287  ; 
justification,  288-311,  312-335,  370 ; 
atrophied,  371. 

Embryology,  40-46. 

Epistles,  genuineness  of,  129. 

Ethics,  Christian,  288,  336. 

Evidence,  3,  10. 

Evil,  origin  of,  64-66. 

Evolution,  not  proved,  26  ;  and  mod- 
ern thought,  28,  33,  34  ;  and  higher 
criticism,  35  ;  and  Biblical  history, 
35 ;  and  Christianity,  35  ;  and  Gene- 
sis, 36  ;  in  O.  T.,  37  ;  in  N.  T.,  38  ; 
hard  to  believe,  39 ;  ontogenetic 
parallel,  40  ;  a  s3Tiopfiis,  41  ;  depend- 
ent,  44 ;  theistic   implications,   47, 


376 


INDEX 


49,  50 ;  and  Firsr  Cause,  52  ;  its  fu- 
ture, 57  ;  of  ethics,  60-64 ;  difficul- 
ties, 65 ;  and  Adam,  68  ;  and  Paul, 
69 ;  of  dogma,  204. 

Example,  influence  of,  230. 

Experience,  argiunent  from,  14,  16, 
98  ;  in  N.  T.,  99. 

Faith,  according  to  President  Hop- 
kins, 4 ;  practical,  17-20,  302  ;  to 
Epistle  to  Hebrews,  23  ;  of  Thomas, 
23 ;  of  Abraham,  24,  329,  330 ;  not 
unscientific,  24-27  ;  justification  by, 
288,  323  ;  and  righteousness,  298 ; 
and  law,  299 ;  a  moral  force,  320, 
321.   (See  also  BeUef.) 

Fall  of  man,  66. 

First  Cause,  52,  57. 

First  man,  68. 

Fiske,  John,  descent  of  man,  32  ;  fu- 
ture of  evolution,  56 ;  moral  evil,  67  ; 
Aztecs,  190. 

Forbes,  A.,  surrender  of  Napoleon 
III.,  145-159. 

Gautama,  231,  233. 

Genesis,  and  struggle  for  existence,  75. 

God,  character  of,  59-64  ;  argument 
for  existence,  89  ;  argument  weak- 
ened by  evolution,  90,  92  ;  the  true 
induction,  92-95,  97-101 ;  induction 
in  N.  T.,  99 ;  self-sacrifice  of,  234  ; 
belief  in  this  needed,  232  ;  Biblical 
idea  of,  238,  243 ;  characteristics  of, 
239-242  ;  incarnation  credible,  254, 
257  ;  Christ  in  God,  257. 

Haeckel,  proof  of  evolution,  26 ; 
Weismannism,  31 ;  evolution  histor- 
ical, 32 ;  phylogeny,  41,  46  ;  onto- 
geny, 43. 

Hamack,  dates  of  Gospels,  128 ;  Fourth 
Gospel,  130;  Johannine  writings, 
133. 

Hebrews,  the  religious  genius  of,  185  ; 
inductive  theism  of,  188  ;  as  critics, 
188 ;  theological  self-consistency  of, 
189. 

Hopkins,  President,  faith,  49. 

Hume's  argument,  6,  105. 

Huxley,  on  doubt,  1  ;  on  knowledge, 
9  ;  and  Genesis,  36  ;  Buddhism,  56  ; 
protoplasm,  75;  Jewish  monothe- 
ism, 251. 

Hypotheses,  25,  365. 


Idealization,  in  O.  T.,  190. 

Immortality,  F.  W.  Robertson,  6  ; 
Butler,  6  ;  Spencer,  73. 

Incarnation,  need  of,  233,  234;  and 
theophanies,  236  ;  teachings  of  N. 
T.,  250,  251  ;  independence  of  au- 
thorities for,  252  ;  r6sum6,  260. 

Induction,  82-84 ;  methods  of,  84-87  ; 
of  critical  tendency,  132-135. 

Inductive  theism,  92-101 ;  of  the  He- 
brews, 186. 

Inspiration,  verbal,  142 ;  implied  in 
miracles,  175 ;  also  in  deism,  176  ; 
natural,  179 ;  physical,  181  ;  of  tal- 
ent, 182 ;  literary  inspiration  of 
Bible,  183  ;  normal,  184  ;  of  the  He- 
brews, 185;  errors,  189,  190,  192; 
exceptional,  194 ;  supernatural,  195 ; 
and  evolution,  196  ;  not  indispensa- 
ble, 201. 

Joel,  on  inspiration,  198. 

John,  resurrection  of  Christ,  161-163, 

165,  166,  168,  169,  171,  173. 
Justification  by  faith,  not  mysterious, 

333  ;  in  civil  law,  334.    (See  Faith.) 

Keys,  gift  of,  225. 

Kidd,  conditions  of  progress,  119. 

"Knots"   in    moral    evolution,    116, 

234,  287,  305. 
Knowledge,  79. 

Law,  and  grace,  218  ;  human  idea  of, 
274  ;' personified,  275  ;  and  mercy  in 
O.  T.,  277  ;  in  N.  T.,  278 ;  in  nature, 
278  ;  universal,  290. 

Lecky,  on  proof,  1. 

Lessing,  resurrection  of  Christ,  127. 

Love,  288,  336  ;  indivisible,  337 ;  of 
Good  Samaritan,  340 ;  missionary, 
341,  345  ;  and  culture,  354. 

Luke,  resurrection,  161-163,  165-171. 

Luther,  Martin,  302,  370. 

Mark,  resurrection,  161-169,  171. 

Martineau,  James,  53. 

Mary  Magdalene  and  resurrection, 
161-163,  165,  166,  169,  170,  172,  173. 

Mary,  "  the  other,"  161,  167-170, 172. 

Mathematical  reasoning,  2,  81. 

Matthew,  resurrection,  161-171,  172. 

Mill,  J.  S.,  argument  from  design,  5, 
90  ;  indecision  of  science,  15  ;  im- 
mortality, 21  ;  hypotheses,  25 ;  in- 


INDEX 


377 


duction,  79,  84-87  ;  deduction,  79  ; 
Hume,  106 ;  miracles,  107,  115  ; 
words  of  Christ,  135 ;  God  and 
Christ,  257  ;  native  goodness,  316. 

Mill,  James,  61. 

Milton  and  Darwin,  69. 

Mind,  action  of,  178. 

Miracles,  Hume,  105;  Brown,  106; 
definition,  107,  109  ;  scientific,  107  ; 
natural,  109,  110,  191  ;  kind  of  par- 
able, 136,  329  ;  uncritical  witn-'sses, 
137;  in  O.  T.,  140;  in  evolution, 
114;  in  mechanics,  112;  not  me- 
chanical, 116  ;  needed,  116-120;  ob- 
ject-lessons, 325-328  ;  temporary, 
328. 

Missions,  spirit  of,  342,  foreign,  342, 
345,  346,  348 ;  and  character,  350, 
353. 

Mivart,  religion,  36 ;  missing  links, 
114. 

Miiller,  Max,  goodness,  61. 

Napoleon  III.,  surrender  of,  144-160, 
174. 

Natural  selection  and  Hebrew  theism, 
187;  in  0.  T.,  37,  38,  187. 

Nature,  uniformity  of,  112  ;  cruelty  of, 
70. 

Needs  of  man  prophetic,  235  ;  need  of 
divine  example,  235  ;  of  divine  com- 
panionship, 236. 

Old  Testament,  as  history,  192 ;  pro- 
phecy, 193. 

Omnipotence,  74. 

Orthodoxy  and  mission  of  Christ,  357  ; 
and  human  needs,  369. 

Pain,  70  ;  not  agglomerated,  71 ;  rel- 
atively small,  73  ;  and  longevity, 
73 ;  educational,  73  ;  teleology  of, 
75. 

Parables,  136,  329. 

Paul,  fall  of  man,  70 ;  end  of  creation, 
95  ;  resurrection  of  Christ,  129,  161, 
169,  172 ;  love,  183  ;  philosophy  of 
history,  198  ;  law,  290  ;  sin,  305,  314  ; 
and  James,  331. 

Peter,  resurrection  of  Christ,  162, 
165, 169,  171,  173  ;  inspiration,  198, 
and  the  keys,  225  ;  self-knowledge, 
309. 

Plato,  ethics,  135  ;  sphere  of  influence, 
220. 


Prescott,  W.  H.,  Aztecs,  189,  190. 

Probability  not  proof,  4. 

Proof,  scientific,  1,  2  ;  mathematical, 
2  ;  inductive,  2  ;  demand  for,  88  ;  of 
Christianity,  5,  6. 

Psychology,  its  mystery,  77  ;  of  atone- 
ment, 278,  304  ;  of  justification,  288- 
311 ;  of  belief,  303 ;  of  threats  and 
promises,  306 ;  of  Shakespeare,  308. 

Ransom,  263. 

Recapitulation,  360. 

Religion,  Spencer  on,  52,  56. 

Remission,  through  blood,  277  ;  with- 
out sacrifices,  277  ;  by  nature,  278. 

Renan,  Epistles  of  Paul,  134. 

Residual  phenomena,  65. 

Resurrection  of  Christ,  120  ;  evidence 
of,  123-140,  160-174,  and  modern 
history,  123. 

Robertson,  Rev.  F.  W.,  6. 

Romanes,  physical  selection,  30  ;  Weis- 
mannism,  31 ;  religion,  36 ;  embry- 
ology, 42 ;  cruelty  of  nature,  70 ; 
biographies  of  Christ,  135. 

Russell,  Dr.,  surrender  of  Napoleon 
III.,  148. 

Science,  and  gospel,  102 ;  its  ethical 
obligations,  306  ;  its  limitations, 
366. 

Scientific  proof,  1  ;  of  God,  92-99. 

Sermon  on  the  Mount,  a  correct  ideal, 
60,  289  ;  its  ethics  superhuman,  204, 
205,  224. 

Sheridan,  Gen.,  surrender  of  Napo- 
leon III.,  145. 

Sin,  and  ideals,  290,  293 ;  revolution- 
ary, 294  ;  neutralized,  298  ;  growth 
of,  312. 

Spencer,  H.,  Weismannism,  31 ;  First 
Cause,  52,  53  ;  ethics,  61  ;  immor- 
tality, 73 ;  religion,  56. 

Spinoza's  reasoning,  80. 

Strauss,  miracles,  105  ;  N.  T.  writings, 
127  ;  resurrection,  139. 

Supernatural,  the,  definition,  108 ; 
economy  of,  143,  291  ;  cannot  be 
spared,  371 . 

Syllogism,  80. 

Testimony,  critical,  137;  discrepan- 
cies in,  141  ;  and  verbal  inspiration, 
142  ;  normal,  159,  174  ;  to  resurrec- 
tion, 160-171 ;  harmonized,  172. 


378  INDEX 

Theology,  its  unscientific  argiiments,    Virtue,  293. 


Theophanies,  236. 

Trinity,    the,    222,    definition, 

practical  bearing  of,  370. 
Tubingen  school,  127- 
TyndaU,  101,  108. 


260; 


Wallace,  sexual  selection,  29  ;  moral 
evolution,  29 ;  religion,  36  ;  con- 
science, 61  ;  sanctity,  61 ;  truthful- 
ness, 61 ;  fall  of  man,  67. 

Weismann,  acquired  traits,  30. 


Electrotyped  and  printed  by  H.  O.  Houghton  &>  Co. 
Cambridge,  Mass.,  U.S.  A. 


Princeton  Theological  Seminary  Libraries 


1    1012  01235  4538 


